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 + AT Central Excise - 2016 (8) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2016 (8) TMI 746 - AT - Central Excise


Issues:
Confirmation of interest liability without issuance of show cause notice.

Analysis:
The appeal was against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) confirming interest liability without the issuance of a show cause notice. The appellant contended that this confirmation was not in line with statutory provisions. The appellant, engaged in manufacturing PSC sleepers, had initially supplied goods at a provisional price to Indian Railways, which was later finalized. The provisional assessment was conducted under Rule 9(B) of Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Rule 7 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. After submission of required documents, the final assessment was completed by the adjudicating authority, and the appellant paid the assessed differential duty. The department confirmed interest liability for the differential duty under Rule 7(4) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The appellant contested this confirmation, arguing that no show cause notice had been issued regarding the interest liability.

The Tribunal noted that Rule 7(4) mandates the assessee to pay interest on any amount due after the final assessment order. It was clarified that interest liability is automatic when the differential duty is paid post finalization of assessment. Rule 7 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 does not explicitly require a show cause notice for the payment of interest by the Department. The Tribunal opined that no specific show cause notice was necessary for recovering the interest amount. Since the adjudication order clearly stated the requirement to pay interest under Rule 7(4), the Tribunal found no fault in the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as the Tribunal saw no reason to interfere with the impugned order.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues involved, the contentions of the parties, and the legal reasoning applied by the Tribunal in arriving at its decision.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates