Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
CGST - Acts + GST Rates GST Ntf. GST Forms GST - Manual GST - FAQ State GST Acts SGST Ntf. I. Tax Manual
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Michigan Rubber (India) Ltd. Versus C.C.E. Bhopal

2016 (340) E.L.T. 528 (Tri. - Del.) - Demand of duty with interest - imposition of penalty - manufacture of Rubber tyres of motor vehicles classifiable under chapter 40112090 of the Scheduled to Central Excise Tariff Act 1985 - payment of duty at the time of removal of consignment - Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 - Held that: - It is an admitted fact that the appellant had defaulted in making payment of Central Excise duty within the stipulated time frame prescribed under Rule 8 of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

herefore, we are of the view that the payment made by the appellant is to be construed as payment of duty in terms of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. With regard to payment of interest on delayed payment of duty, we are of the view that no such specific provisions exist in the Central Excise Rules, providing for relaxation from payment of interest in any circumstances. Therefore, in absence of any specific provisions, we are of the considered opinion that the appellant is liable to pay .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. S.K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial) And Mr. R. K. Singh, Member (Technical) Mr. Shekhar Vyas (Advocate) for the Appellant Mr. R. K. Manjhi (DR) appeared for the Respondent ORDER Per S. K. Mohanty The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Rubber tyres of motor vehicles classifiable under chapter 40112090 of the Scheduled to Central Excise Tariff Act 1985. During the period 01.03.2007 to 20.03.2007 the appellant had defaulted in payment of Central Excise dut .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

der, the appellant has preferred the present appeal before this Tribunal. 2. Shri. Shekhar Vyas, the Ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that the non-payment of Central Excise duty within the stipulated time frame was owing to the reason that the relevant documents were seized by the DGCEI Officers and after much persuasion, the documents were ultimately returned to the appellant on 17.09.2007 and immediately thereafter, the duty liability attributable to clearance of finished produ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version