2007 (11) TMI 519 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Charging of interest on supplementary invoices for enhancement of purchase order value.

Analysis:
The case involved three appeals filed by the Revenue against an order-in-appeal dated 30-11-2006. The main issue was regarding the charging of interest on supplementary invoices raised by the respondent-assessee for the enhancement of the purchase order value. The respondent had discharged the duty liability based on the original purchase order but later sought an enhancement of the price of the goods due to increased input prices. The key question was whether interest was payable on the differential duty paid by the assessee.

The Tribunal considered the submissions and records, focusing on the timing of events. The respondent had raised supplementary invoices after negotiations with purchasers led to an increase in the value of goods. The judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature of Bombay Bench was cited, which held that interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act was not applicable when duty was paid voluntarily upon learning of revised rates. The court emphasized that there was no time gap between learning about the revised rates and paying the duty, indicating no delay in payment.

The Assistant Commissioner contended that interest was payable on the differential duty as the entire duty was supposedly payable at the time of goods clearance. However, both the Commissioner (Appeals) and the CESTAT found that the duty was paid promptly upon learning of the revised rates, negating the need for interest payment. The judgment highlighted that Section 11AB comes into play when duty is short-paid, which was not the case here as the duty was paid as soon as it became known to the assessee.

Ultimately, the Tribunal, in line with the High Court's judgment, dismissed the Revenue's appeals and disposed of the cross-objection filed by the respondents in support of the order-in-appeal. The decision was based on the principle that interest under Section 11AB was not applicable in this scenario where duty was voluntarily paid upon discovering the revised rates, without any delay in payment.