2003 (1) TMI 135 - CGOVT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Interpretation of Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 regarding the chargeability of interest on duty demands confirmed after 28-9-96 for acts done prior to that date.

Analysis:
- The Revision Application was filed against an Order-in-Appeal that confirmed a demand for an erroneously sanctioned rebate. The Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-I directed the lower authority to file an appeal, which was rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals).
- The grounds for the Revision Application included the applicability of Section 11AB, which allows for the levy of interest on duty determined to be payable by the assessee. The contention was that interest should have been charged on the entire amount of the erroneous rebate confirmed in the order from the date it became payable until the date of payment.
- The respondents argued that interest under Section 11AB was not chargeable as the demand pertained to a period before the enactment of Section 11AB in September 1996. They cited legal precedents and the Apex Court decision in Elgi Equipments Ltd. to support their position.
- The government considered various judgments, including the case of Unigress Infotech Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai, which held that Section 11AB is not applicable retrospectively. Additionally, the Circular No. 655/46/2002-CX clarified that Section 11AB can only be invoked for clearances after 28-9-96.
- The government concluded that the Commissioner (A)'s order was proper and legal, rejecting the Revision Application based on the interpretation of Section 11AB and the relevant legal precedents.

This detailed analysis highlights the key arguments, legal interpretations, and precedents considered in the judgment regarding the chargeability of interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for duty demands confirmed after 28-9-96.