9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (4) TMI 362X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd Tea Waste. The respondents had discharged their liability for additional duty of excise, voluntarily. The Department sought to recover interest from them under the provisions of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The respondents contested the show cause notice. The adjudicating authority confirmed the recovery of interest. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the Order-in-Original and allowed the appeals of the respondents herein. Hence these appeals by the Revenue. 3. The learned J.D.R. submits that the interest is chargeable under the provisions of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, as the respondents had availed the benefits for payments of additional duty of excise in terms of the provisions of Rule 8. He, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in force. (3) The provisions of the Central Excise Act and the rules made thereunder, including those relating to refunds and exemptions from duties and imposition of penalty, shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the levy and collection of the additional duty of excise leviable under this section in respect of the goods specified in the Fourth Schedule as they apply in relation to the levy and collection of the duties of excise on such goods under that Act or those rules, as the case may be. The provisions of Central Excise Rules were made applicable in respect of refunds, exemptions from duty and imposition of penalty under sub-section 3 of Section 157 of the Finance Act, 2003. This sub-section does not provide for recovery o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mposition for the same. Article 265 of the Constitution provides that no tax shall be levied or collected expressly provided. The Act created liability for additional duty for excise, but created no liability for any penalty. That being so, the confiscation proceedings against the respondents were unwarranted and without authority of law. 5.1 I find that the provisions of sub-section 3 of Additional Duties (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957 were identical to the wording of the sub-section (3) of Section 157 of the Finance Act, 2003. Hence I find that the ratio of the Honourable Supreme Court s decision in the case of Collector of C. Ex., Ahmedabad v. Orient Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. (supra) squarely covers the issue in these cases. 5.2 Fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
