2003 (9) TMI 487 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Confirmation of interest under the impugned order.
- Applicability of Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act.
- Challenge to findings of absence of suppression or fraud.
- Imposition of interest and penalties.

Confirmation of Interest:
The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the non-confirmation of interest under the impugned order. The case involved M/s. Telco Ltd. availing Modvat credit but removing goods without payment of Central Excise duty. The Additional Commissioner confirmed the duty demand, penalties, and interest. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the demand but set aside penalties and interest, citing non-retrospective application of relevant sections. The Revenue argued that interest under Section 11AB could be imposed post-28-9-96. The respondent contended that Section 11AB did not apply to transactions predating its enforcement.

Applicability of Section 11AB:
The Tribunal held that interest under Section 11AB could be imposed for the period post-28-9-96. The demand confirmed spanned from 20-4-94 to 8-9-97, partially falling after the enactment of Section 11AB. The Revenue's appeal against non-confirmation of interest indicated disagreement with findings of no suppression. The show cause notice was issued within the extended limitation period, and the respondents did not challenge the duty confirmation. The Tribunal ruled that interest was payable for the period post-28-9-96 to 8-9-97, dismissing the appeal.

Challenge to Findings of Absence of Suppression or Fraud:
The respondent argued that since the Revenue did not contest the absence of suppression or fraud, interest under Section 11AB could not be imposed. However, the Tribunal found that the Revenue's appeal for interest contradicted acceptance of the absence of suppression. The non-challenge to penalties under Section 11AC did not affect the appeal for interest under Section 11AB.

Imposition of Interest and Penalties:
Ultimately, the Tribunal held the respondents liable to pay interest on the duty demand for the period post-28-9-96 to 8-9-97. The appeal was disposed of, affirming the imposition of interest under Section 11AB despite the non-challenge to penalties and the absence of suppression or fraud findings.