Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2014 (6) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2014 (6) TMI 60 - HC - Central Excise


Issues:
1. Excise duty payment deadline and consequences of delay.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged an order directing them to pay excise duty on each consignment for a two-month period due to a delay in payment. The petitioner, engaged in manufacturing soles and heels, failed to pay the duty by the deadline as per Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules 2002. The rule mandates payment by the 5th day of the following month, with provisions for interest on delayed payments. Failure to pay within 30 days from the due date results in forfeiting installment facilities and requires payment on a consignment basis for two months from the order date.

In this case, the petitioner missed the deadline for September 2005, citing bank closures during festivals. Despite presenting a cheque to the Excise department on the next working day after the due date, the Assistant Commissioner ordered duty payment for two months due to the delay. The petitioner's claim of presenting the cheque on time due to bank holidays was uncontroverted, leading to a legal question on the computation of time when the last day falls on a holiday.

Referring to Section 10 of the General Clauses Act, the court held that if a prescribed period ends on a holiday, the act should be considered timely if done on the next working day. Citing precedent, the court emphasized the purpose of the provision to allow actions impossible on holidays to be completed on the following working day. Consequently, the petitioner's payment on the next working day was deemed timely, absolving them of default under Rule 8.

The judgment quashed the impugned order, ruling in favor of the petitioner. The court found the payment made on the subsequent working day as compliant with the statutory provisions, thereby annulling the duty payment directive for two months. The writ petition was allowed with no costs imposed, providing relief to the petitioner in the excise duty dispute.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates