9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (6) TMI 263 - AT - Central ExciseLeviability of interest - Held that - Adjudication order which gave rise to the demand of duty to the extent confirmed by Tribunal, becomes enforceable demand. Only if that demand is not paid, then there shall be levy of interest. But that is not the case in the present appeal. The demand which was ultimately reduced by Tribunal having been discharged by appellant there shall be no interest liability. - Proposition of law stated by learned counsel, fortified by the decision of Hon ble High Court of Chhattisgarh does not call for any different proposition. - Decision in the case of Raiur Bright Steel & Wire Weld Industries Ltd. Vs. Union of India - 2014 (9) TMI 240 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues: Appeal dismissal for non-appearance, restoration of appeal, leviability of interest on demand
In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI, the appeal was dismissed due to the non-appearance of the counsel, who was 88 years old. The appellant argued that dismissing the appeal without considering its merit would be against the law established by the apex court in a specific case. The Tribunal noted that the appeal was old and had been dismissed ex-parte. To ensure justice to both sides, the restoration of the appeal was deemed necessary and subsequently done. Regarding the merit of the case, the dispute centered around the leviability of interest on the demand arising from the Tribunal's decision. The appellant contended that as the demand reduced by the Tribunal had been paid, there should be no interest liability. The appellant referred to Explanation I to section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944, to support this argument. The appellant also cited a decision by the Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh in a similar case. On the contrary, the Revenue argued that the lower authority's orders were correct, and interest was indeed payable. The Tribunal, agreeing with the appellant's proposition of law supported by the Chhattisgarh High Court decision, allowed the appeal. The judgment specified that any consequential relief should be granted in accordance with the law.
|
