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 the amount of Rs. 3,50,000/- paid by the appellant during the relevant period was required to be adjusted towards the duty liability confirmed in the impugned order.
Analysis: The dispute arose in the context of duty liability under the compounded levy scheme and the directions issued in the earlier remand order, which required adjustment of excess duty paid for the later period against the duty recoverable for the earlier period. The impugned order confirmed duty for January 1999 to June 1999 and also directed deposit of Rs. 2,95,142/- for July 1999 to November 1999. Since the appellant specifically sought adjustment of Rs. 3,50,000/- already paid during 08.09.2014 to 01.12.2014, and there was no objection to the confirmed demand itself, the adjustment claim was examined as a matter of recovery and quantification.
Conclusion: The amount of Rs. 3,50,000/- was directed to be adjusted towards partial recovery of the confirmed duty demand, and the appellant succeeded to that extent.
Final Conclusion: The appeal was disposed of by granting partial relief to the appellant through direction for adjustment of the payment already made against the duty liability confirmed in the impugned order.
Ratio Decidendi: Where duty liability is re-quantified after remand and the assessee has made a specific payment towards the same composite demand, such payment must be adjusted against the confirmed duty liability in the interests of correct recovery.
TaxTMI 
