Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2015 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (10) TMI 1542 - AT - Central ExciseDenial of CENVAT Credit - failure to discharge the full duty liability - payment of that duty through PLA along with interest - Held that:- Requirement of this sub-rule to pay duty without utilizing CENVAT Credit during the period of delay in discharge of duty liability for a particular month, which is beyond the period of one month from the due date, is unconstitutional; and though Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Unirols Airetx Vs. Assistant Commr. Of C. Ex. Coimbatore (2013 (12) TMI 1398 - MADRAS HIGH COURT) and Commr. Of C. Ex., Chennai-III Vs. A.R. Metallurgicals Pvt Limited (2011 (10) TMI 542 - MADRAS HIGH COURT) and Hon'ble Karnatka High Court in the case of Manjunatha Industries Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. (Appeals-I), Bangalore (2013 (4) TMI 534 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT) have, taking into the account the provisions of Rule 8 (3A) held that during the period of delay in discharge of monthly duty liability for a particular month beyond the period of one month from due date, the provisions of Rule 8 (3A) become applicable and the duty on the goods cleared during this period is required to be paid without utilizing the CENVAT Credit, the High Courts have not gone into the question of constitutionality of this provision. - When sub-rule 3 (A) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 has been struck down as unconstitutional by two High Courts, in our view, Commissioner's order based on the Rule 8 (3A) would not survive. Hence, the impugned order is set aside. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|