2006 (10) TMI 323

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is an appeal filed by M/s. Ford India Private Limited, Chennai. The appellants had cleared cars manufactured by it availing exemption contained in Notification No. 5/1999-C.E., dated 28-2-1999. As per the conditions of the Notification, the appellants received refund of Special Excise Duty (SED) paid on several cars cleared during the year 2000 on production of certificate from the authorised off .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... thority by the appellants. The buyer of the vehicle paid the amount of exemption availed on 28-6-2004 and the same was appropriated as per the order of the original authority. In the impugned order, the lower appellate authority sustained the demand of interest made in the Order-in-Original under Section 11AB, but vacated the penalty under Section 11AC. The present appeal challenges the demand of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... se the department had come to know of the fraud involved only on 29-8-2001. No benefit was available to the appellants on account of the fraud involved. However, she could not categorically state as to from which date the interest would be computed for recovery if it was not from the date the appellants had received erroneous refund viz, 19-1-2001. 3. I have heard both sides and considered their .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X