2009 (3) TMI 789 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

The appellate tribunal, CESTAT Mumbai, reviewed a case where the original authority confirmed a demand for differential duty against the assessee and imposed interest and a penalty. Both the assessee and the Revenue appealed to the Commissioner (Appeals), with the former contesting the demand and the latter objecting to the penalty. The appellate authority allowed the Revenue's appeal by enhancing the penalty. The Commissioner (Appeals) did not thoroughly consider the grounds of the assessee's appeal. The assessee's present appeal challenges the demand of differential duty on several grounds, including that the assessments were final and that the differential price was paid by the buyers. The fundamental question is whether the assessee should have opted for provisional assessment and whether interest should be paid on the differential duty. These issues are pending before a Larger Bench of the Tribunal. The appellants are entitled to a total waiver and stay, especially as the duty was paid before the show cause notice was issued. The matter was on hold pending a decision by the Larger Bench. The judge noted that there would be a waiver of pre-deposit for the outstanding dues. The judge was convinced of a denial of natural justice to the assessee by the lower appellate authority but refrained from remanding the matter due to relevant considerations. The case was dictated in court by Shri P.G. Chacko, J., with Shri A.P. Kolte representing the Appellant and Shri Kishori Lal representing the Respondent.