9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 322X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ., firstly that there was about ₹ 3.27 lakhs lying to the credit of the assessee in its CENVAT account and secondly he in fact did paid the amount claiming that the short payment was due to oversight. Having regard to these facts and the circumstance that Rule 8 (3A) itself has been struck down and is no longer in existence, which we entirely concur with, we find no infirmity with the CESTAT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - through PLA. As such there was short payment of about ₹ 2,00,000/-. Undisputedly, the respondent had ₹ 3,27,000/- lying in its CENVAT credit. Its explanation was that there was an error in his computer system which could be detected only later. The assessee paid the balance amount of duty on 19.12.2012 together with interest. Claiming that the assessee was bound to discharge full lia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
