Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
The appellant paid excise duty on the removal of inputs as such, based on the transaction value. However, this excise duty was found to be in excess of the actual CENVAT credit involved in such removal. Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944, states that if an assessee collects an amount in the name of excise duty and retains it, the same must be credited to the Central Government. In this case, although the appellant charged excise duty over and above the CENVAT credit involved, the total amount collected from the customer was paid by debiting the CENVAT account. According to the CESTAT judgment in Shivam Metals, if the amount collected in the name of excise duty is paid to the government, the demand for such amount cannot be raised invoking Section 11D. Therefore, the demand u/s 11D in the present case is not sustainable, and the impugned orders are set aside, allowing the appeals.
The appellant paid excise duty on the removal of inputs as such, based on the transaction value. However, this excise duty was found to be in excess of the actual CENVAT credit involved in such removal. Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944, states that if an assessee collects an amount in the name of excise duty and retains it, the same must be credited to the Central Government. In this case, although the appellant charged excise duty over and above the CENVAT credit involved, the total amount collected from the customer was paid by debiting the CENVAT account. According to the CESTAT judgment in Shivam Metals, if the amount collected in the name of excise duty is paid to the government, the demand for such amount cannot be raised invoking Section 11D. Therefore, the demand u/s 11D in the present case is not sustainable, and the impugned orders are set aside, allowing the appeals.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
