https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335112 Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could not be used to recover duty already deposited with the department, including where payment was made by debiting the CENVAT credit account rather than by cash. The article notes that the disputed amount had in fact been paid, and binding High Court authority treated such discharge as sufficient to defeat Section 11D recovery merely because the assessee did not avail the exemption and instead paid duty at a higher rate. On that basis, the demand under Section 11D was held unsustainable and the adverse finding was set aside. en-us Fri, 28 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Nov 2016 10:30:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335112 Section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could not be used to recover duty already deposited with the department, including where payment was made by debiting the CENVAT credit account rather than by cash. The article notes that the disputed amount had in fact been paid, and binding High Court authority treated such discharge as sufficient to defeat Section 11D recovery merely because the assessee did not avail the exemption and instead paid duty at a higher rate. On that basis, the demand under Section 11D was held unsustainable and the adverse finding was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 28 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335112