https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53484 Withdrawal of the fortnightly central excise duty payment facility under Rule 173G(1)(e) must be made by the proper officer, understood as the Assistant or Deputy Commissioner, and not by a Superintendent acting without a show cause notice or proper order; such withdrawal is contrary to the rule and natural justice. In addition, where Cenvat credit and corresponding Modvat credit create revenue neutrality, the element of intent to evade duty is negated and the extended limitation period is not attracted, so the duty demand cannot be sustained on limitation grounds. en-us Fri, 29 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Oct 2010 15:29:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53484 Withdrawal of the fortnightly central excise duty payment facility under Rule 173G(1)(e) must be made by the proper officer, understood as the Assistant or Deputy Commissioner, and not by a Superintendent acting without a show cause notice or proper order; such withdrawal is contrary to the rule and natural justice. In addition, where Cenvat credit and corresponding Modvat credit create revenue neutrality, the element of intent to evade duty is negated and the extended limitation period is not attracted, so the duty demand cannot be sustained on limitation grounds. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 29 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53484