https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268769 Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 could not support denial of duty payment through the Cenvat account where the Gujarat HC had already held the rule unconstitutional. The proposed demand, along with interest and penalty under Rule 8(3A) read with section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, was therefore unsustainable. On that basis, the tribunal upheld the order setting aside the adjudication order and rejected the Revenue's appeal in favour of the assessee. en-us Thu, 08 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Dec 2015 01:35:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268769 Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 could not support denial of duty payment through the Cenvat account where the Gujarat HC had already held the rule unconstitutional. The proposed demand, along with interest and penalty under Rule 8(3A) read with section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, was therefore unsustainable. On that basis, the tribunal upheld the order setting aside the adjudication order and rejected the Revenue's appeal in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 08 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268769