Just a moment...

Top
Help
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal Upholds Interest Liability, Validates Payment, and Reduces Penalty</h1> <h3>M/s. Michigan Rubber (India) Ltd. Versus C.C.E. Bhopal</h3> The Tribunal upheld the interest liability for delayed payment of Central Excise duty, validated the payment made from the cenvat account, and reduced the ... 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 the Central Excise Rules, 2002. It is also an admitted fact that the entire duty liability confirmed in the impugned order was paid by the appellant, partly from its cenvat account and partly from the personal ledger account. So far as payment from the cenvat account is concerned, the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Indsur Global Ltd. (2014 (12) TMI 585 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT) have held that payment from the cenvat account during the defaulted period is to be considered as a valid payment. Therefore, 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 interest for delayed payment of Central Excise duty. Thus, the interest liability is confirmed. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the penalty of ₹ 25,00,000/- imposed in the adjudication order is in the higher side and in the interest of justice, we reduce the penalty to ₹ 1,00,000/- - appeal disposed off - decided partly in favor of assessee. Issues:Non-payment of Central Excise duty within stipulated time frame, validity of payment from cenvat account, liability for interest on delayed payment, imposition of penalty.Analysis:1. Non-payment of Central Excise Duty:The appellant failed to pay Central Excise duty within the prescribed time frame, leading to a demand of &8377; 1,77,46,237/- along with interest and a penalty of &8377; 25,00,000. The appellant argued that the delay was due to documents being seized by DGCEI Officers, and payment was made once the documents were returned. The Tribunal acknowledged the default but considered the duty payment made by the appellant as valid under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, citing a judgment by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court.2. Validity of Payment from Cenvat Account:The Tribunal referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in a similar case to establish that payment from the cenvat account during the default period is considered valid. As the appellant had partially paid the duty from the cenvat account, it was deemed as payment in accordance with Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002.3. Liability for Interest on Delayed Payment:The Tribunal noted that there were no specific provisions in the Central Excise Rules exempting payment of interest in any circumstances. Therefore, the appellant was held liable to pay interest for the delayed payment of Central Excise duty. The interest liability was confirmed by the Tribunal based on the absence of any provisions providing for relaxation from payment of interest.4. Imposition of Penalty:The Tribunal considered the penalty of &8377; 25,00,000 imposed in the adjudication order as excessive and reduced it to &8377; 1,00,000 in the interest of justice. After evaluating the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal found the reduced penalty amount to be more appropriate. The appeal was disposed of with the revised penalty amount.In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the interest liability for delayed payment of Central Excise duty, validated the payment made from the cenvat account, and reduced the penalty amount imposed on the appellant. The judgment provided a detailed analysis of each issue raised by the parties and applied relevant legal precedents to reach a fair decision.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found