Calling the Situation Grim, the Supreme Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance of Delays in NCLT Approvals || Supreme Court: Admission of a Claim by a Resolution Professional is Not Debt Acknowledgment || Supreme Court: Public Figures Must Exercise Caution as Their Words Have Consequences in Society || SC: State Must Act as a Model Employer, Criticising the Union For Not Regularising ISRO Workers || J&K&L High Court: Minor Minerals Have Major Environmental Impacts and Must be Regulated || Del HC: Unexplained Money Received by Public Servant is Not Bribery Without Proof of Official Favour || Del HC: There is No Absolute Bar on Granting Co-Convicts Parole/Furlough Together in Suitable Cases || Bom HC: LARR Authority Can Examine Limitation Issues in Land Acquisition References under 2013 Act || MP HC: Long-Serving Employees Cannot Be Denied Regularisation by Retrospective Statutory Amendments || J&K&L HC: Routine Challenges to Lok Adalat Awards Defeat Their Purpose of Quick Dispute Resolution

Recovery of confirmed demands during pendency of stay application- (Ministry of Finance ) (04 Jul 2016)

MANU/EXCR/0024/2016

Excise

The Ministry of Finance brought changes to its 2013 notification on the recovery of confirmed demands while assessee’s stay application remains pending, in light of court decisions.

Courts have not been in favour of the Department collecting confirmed demands from the assessee during pendency of the stay, unless the demand has been conformed by CESTAT or the High Court.

The Ministry, erring on the side of caution, stated that even in the case of demands confirmed by court, recovery should be initiated only after 60 days from the order of the court.

Relevant : Recovery of confirmed demand MANU/EXCR/0002/2013 Amendments to the Appeal provisions MANU/EXCR/0008/2014

Tags : EXCISE CONFIRMED DEMAND STAY APPLICATION

Share :