Supreme Court Lays Down Principles Governing Joint Trials in Criminal Cases under CrPC and BNSS || Karnataka HC: Person Joining Festivals of Another Religion Does Not Violate Rights || Himachal Pradesh High Court: Recovery of Money without Proof of Demand Is Not Bribery || Kerala HC: Cognizance Of Rape u/s 376B IPC Needs Complaint by Separated Wife, Not on Police Report || J&K&L HC: Dealership & Lease Agreements Are Separate Contracts and Disputes Must Be Filed Separately || Calcutta High Court: Unemployment Does Not Excuse Able-Bodied Husband from Maintaining His Wife || Ker. HC: Violating the Procedure for Sampling Contraband u/s 53A of Abkari Act Vitiates Prosecution || Delhi High Court: Students with Less Than 75% Attendance Cannot Contest DU Student Union Elections || Delhi High Court: UGC Cannot Debar a University from PhD Admissions under UGC Act || Delhi High Court: MCD's Higher Property Tax on Luxury Hotels Not Arbitrary

Jayaswal Neco Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur - (Supreme Court) (06 Aug 2015)

Rule 173G payment from CENVAT Account

MANU/SC/0839/2015

Excise

The Supreme Court held in favour of an Assessee claiming payment from its CENVAT Account could be counted towards demand under Rule 173G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Court, affirming the position taken in a previous High Court judgment, added that since then the Central Excise Rules, 2002 themselves had been amended discontinuing this provision for payment. The Assessee's dispute had originated prior to the amendment.

Relevant : Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune v. Dai Ichi Karkaria Limited MANU/SC/0467/1999 Eicher Motors Ltd. v. Union of India MANU/SC/0051/1999

Tags : EXCISE CENVAT DUTY PAYMENT

Share :