9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (11) TMI 397X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the Respondent. [Order per : P.S. Bajaj, Member (J)]. This order will dispose of the above captioned two appeals which have been directed against the impugned order-in-originals, dated 30-11-2001 passed by the Commissioner vide which he has confirmed the duty demand of Rs. 74,11,154/- (in appeal No. E/917) and Rs. 4,37,05,930/- (in appeal No. E/918) and also directed the appellants to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d been no suppression of facts or fraud played by the appellants, the provisions of Section 11AB for charging interest could not be invoked. On the other hand, the learned SDR has reiterated the correctness of the impugned order. 3. In appeal No. E/9188, the learned Counsel, however, without contesting the duty liability of the appellants, further submitted that there had been mistake in the cal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2000 would be available to an assessee. But that view had been reversed by the Apex Court in Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Co. v. Collector of Central Excise, Vadodara - 2001 (128) E.L.T. 13. After that decision of the Apex Court, the appellants deposited the differential duty. There is nothing on the record to suggest if there had been any suppression of facts by the appellants from the Depa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so, the impugned orders in this regard deserves to be modified. 5. In view of the discussion made above, the impugned order regarding the confirmation of the duty in appeal No. E/917 stands confirmed in toto. But regarding interest, it is set aside. Similarly, in Appeal No. E/918 the impugned order regarding interest is set aside while in respect of confirmation of the duty, it is upheld subjec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
