Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2021 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (9) TMI 76 - AT - Central ExciseRelevant time for calculation of Interest on the differential duty paid subsequent to the removal of the goods - price is provisional at the time of removal of the goods - interest is chargeable from the due date taking the date of removal of goods or at the time of payment of differential duty - HELD THAT - The issue is no longer in dispute as the same has been settled against the assessee by the Larger Bench of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of M/S. STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, RAIPUR 2019 (5) TMI 657 - SUPREME COURT where it ws held that the interest is chargeable. The facts and circumstances of the present case are identical to the facts of the case, therefore, the appellant is required to pay the interest from the due date taking the date of clearance of the goods till the date of payment of differential duty - appeal dismissed.
Issues involved:
1. Whether interest is leviable on the differential duty paid subsequent to the removal of goods when the price was provisional at the time of removal. Analysis: Issue 1: Interest on differential duty paid on provisional price The Tribunal noted that the appellant did not appear, and the appeal was disposed of based on available records. The Authorized Representative for the Revenue cited judgments like Steel Authority of India and Ashoka Cotsyn to support the finding against the assessee. The Tribunal considered the question of law regarding the payment of interest on differential duty when duty was initially paid on a provisional price and later enhanced. Referring to the Supreme Court's decision in the Steel Authority of India case, the Tribunal highlighted that interest is chargeable from the due date of clearance of goods until the payment of the differential duty. The Tribunal concluded that the interest is chargeable in such cases, similar to the precedent set by the Supreme Court, and upheld the impugned order, dismissing the appeal. This judgment clarifies the liability for interest on differential duty paid after the removal of goods when the price was provisional. It establishes that interest is applicable from the due date of clearance of goods until the payment of the differential duty, based on the Supreme Court's interpretation and precedent in similar cases. The decision aligns with the legal provisions and aims to ensure compliance with duty payment obligations in such scenarios.
|