SC: Under RTE Act, States Cannot Justify Low Teacher Pay by Citing Centre’s Failure to Release Funds || Supreme Court: While a Child’s Welfare is Paramount, It is Not the Sole Factor in Custody Disputes || Supreme Court: High Court Cannot Reject a Plaint While Exercising Jurisdiction under Article 227 || SC: Merely Leasing an Apartment Does Not Bar a Flat Buyer’s Consumer Complaint Against the Builder || Delhi HC: Unproven Adultery Allegations Cannot be Used to Deny Interim Maintenance under the DV Act || Bombay HC: Storing Items in a Fridge isn’t Manufacturing and Doesn’t Make Premises a Factory || Kerala HC: Disability Pension is Not Payable if the Condition is Unrelated to Military Service || Supreme Court: Award Valid Even If Passed After Mandate Expiry When Court Extends Time || Jharkhand HC: Regular Bail Plea During Interim Bail is Not Maintainable under Section 483 BNSS || Cal HC: Theft Claims and Public Humiliation Alone Don’t Amount To Abetment of Suicide U/S 306 IPC

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 :