1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Appellate Tribunal Upholds Decision Against Revenue, Prevents Double Payment</h1> The appellate tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal, upholding the decision in favor of the respondents. The Commissioner (Appeals) rightfully set aside ... Payment of duty, twice - Equity and justice - Cenvat/Modvat Issues involved: Dispute regarding availing Modvat credit and duty payment, correction of Modvat entries without permission.The judgment pertains to an appeal filed by the Revenue against an order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The dispute originated from the availing of Modvat credit and its utilization for duty payment, which was contested by the Central Excise authorities. The Tribunal had ruled in favor of the respondents, allowing the use of Modvat credit. Subsequently, fresh proceedings were initiated alleging that the respondents corrected Modvat entries without proper authorization. The Assistant Commissioner disallowed the Modvat credit and imposed a penalty, which was challenged by the respondents and overturned by the Commissioner (Appeals), leading to the current appeal by the Revenue.Upon review, it was established that the respondents had already paid duty once, either from the Modvat account or the PLA. Initially, duty was settled from the Modvat account, but upon objection, the payment was reversed, and duty was paid from PLA. The Tribunal's decision had favored the respondents in the original dispute. Therefore, the directive to debit the Modvat account again would result in double payment for the same clearances, contravening principles of equity and justice. The Commissioner (Appeals) rightfully set aside the Assistant Commissioner's order, as it was deemed unjust and not in accordance with legal principles.Consequently, the appellate tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's appeal and rejected the same, upholding the decision in favor of the respondents.