https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770947 Sugar cess under the Sugar Cess Act, 1982 was treated as a tax in the nature of duty of excise, not a fee, because it was credited to the Consolidated Fund and applied for public purposes, which negatived any quid pro quo. On that basis, the levy retained the character of excise duty even though it was imposed under the Sugar Cess Act rather than the Central Excise Act. The absence of an express reference to sugar cess in the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 did not by itself bar credit where the levy was substantively excise duty. CENVAT credit was therefore held admissible. en-us Wed, 07 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 May 2025 08:39:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770947 Sugar cess under the Sugar Cess Act, 1982 was treated as a tax in the nature of duty of excise, not a fee, because it was credited to the Consolidated Fund and applied for public purposes, which negatived any quid pro quo. On that basis, the levy retained the character of excise duty even though it was imposed under the Sugar Cess Act rather than the Central Excise Act. The absence of an express reference to sugar cess in the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 did not by itself bar credit where the levy was substantively excise duty. CENVAT credit was therefore held admissible. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 07 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770947