2009 (10) TMI 44 - HC - Central Excise

Interest on duty paid due to revision in price section 11AB held that - differential amount of duty on the basis of upward revision of price of the goods sold earlier would attract levy of interest under Section 11AB of the Act

Summary

Issues:
- Whether interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act is leviable on the difference of duty on goods cleared by a dealer-assessee on the revised price of such goods.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to two appeals filed under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, against orders passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. The central question raised in both appeals is the levy of interest under Section 11AB of the Act on the difference of duty on goods cleared by a dealer-assessee based on revised prices. The Tribunal had relied on a Bombay High Court judgment, holding that interest was not leviable in such cases. However, the Supreme Court, in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune v. SKF India Ltd., overruled this view, emphasizing that the payment of differential duty due to upward price revisions attracts interest under Section 11AB. Consequently, the Tribunal's reliance on the now-overruled Bombay High Court judgment is deemed incorrect.

The judgment underscores that the differential amount of duty resulting from an upward revision of the price of goods sold earlier does indeed attract the levy of interest under Section 11AB of the Act. As a result, the appeals were allowed, and the orders of the Tribunal and the Commissioner, which had set aside the levy of interest, were overturned. The Adjudicating Authority's decision to impose interest under Section 11AB was reinstated. Therefore, the appeals were disposed of in favor of levying interest on the differential duty amount arising from price revisions, in line with the Supreme Court's ruling in the SKF India Ltd. case.

In conclusion, the judgment clarifies the applicability of interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act on differential duty amounts resulting from upward price revisions by dealer-assessees. It highlights the significance of the Supreme Court's ruling in SKF India Ltd. case, which supersedes the earlier position taken by the Bombay High Court. The decision ensures consistency in the interpretation and application of the law concerning the imposition of interest on such duty differentials, aligning with the statutory framework and judicial precedent established by the higher court.