TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a manufacturer who has opted to pay duty at the normal tariff rate under Notification No. 8/2000-C.E. can still be treated as availing the exemption under a notification based on the value of clearances in a financial year so as to be entitled to pay duty monthly under Rule 173G(1)(aa) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.
Analysis: Rule 173G(1)(aa) permits monthly payment only to a manufacturer availing exemption under a notification linked to value of clearances in a financial year. Notification No. 8/2000-C.E. expressly gives a manufacturer the option not to avail the exemption and instead pay the normal rate of duty, and once that option is exercised the manufacturer cannot claim to be availing the exemption for the purpose of Rule 173G(1)(aa). The respondents were paying duty at the tariff rate from the beginning of the financial year and therefore were not using the exemption benefit contemplated by the notification. The plea based on natural justice was rejected as inapplicable on the facts.
Conclusion: The respondents were not entitled to the facility of monthly duty payment under Rule 173G(1)(aa), and the Revenue's appeal succeeded.
Ratio Decidendi: The facility of monthly payment under Rule 173G(1)(aa) is only when the manufacturer actually avails the exemption under the relevant value-based notification; a mere option to remain covered by the notification while paying duty at the normal rate does not amount to availing that exemption.
TaxTMI 
