https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117469 During the forfeiture period of the facility for fortnightly duty payment, the Tribunal considered whether duty could be paid from the Cenvat account instead of the PLA and whether such payment would attract interest and penalty. It noted conflicting prior views: one line held that payment had to be made through the PLA during forfeiture, with Cenvat payment inviting interest and penalty, while another view relied on the Bombay High Court decision in Lloyds Steel Industries Ltd. The Tribunal observed that the earlier cases turned on the deeming fiction in Rule 8 and the provisions governing payment from the account current during forfeiture. The issue was referred to the President for constitution of a Larger Bench. en-us Thu, 23 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Jun 2012 18:05:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117469 During the forfeiture period of the facility for fortnightly duty payment, the Tribunal considered whether duty could be paid from the Cenvat account instead of the PLA and whether such payment would attract interest and penalty. It noted conflicting prior views: one line held that payment had to be made through the PLA during forfeiture, with Cenvat payment inviting interest and penalty, while another view relied on the Bombay High Court decision in Lloyds Steel Industries Ltd. The Tribunal observed that the earlier cases turned on the deeming fiction in Rule 8 and the provisions governing payment from the account current during forfeiture. The issue was referred to the President for constitution of a Larger Bench. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 23 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117469