9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (12) TMI 387X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndent. [Order]. A very short issue involved present appeal. As per the facts on record demand of duty of Rs. 10,62,222/- was confirmed against the appellant by rejecting the modvat credit. Vide stay order passed by Tribunal, appellant was directed to deposit the said amount, which was deposited by them on 28-12-2002. Ultimately, the impugned order was set aside and appeal allowed by Trib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. 67/2003-C.E. (N.T.), dated 12-9-2003. The appellant however demanded interest at the higher rate and challenged the above order before Commissioner(Appeals), who rejected the same by observing as under : Since, the interest is being given in terms of Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the Department cannot go beyond the provisions of the Act. The rate of interest at 6%, therefore ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in a number of matters and as such the rate fixed in terms of the above Notification is not applicable to the deposits made under Section 35F inasmuch as the same is not duty, but deposits. 5. I do not agree with the above contention of the ld. Advocate. As per the provisions of Section 35F of Central Excise Act, relating to appeals before Tribunal, an assessee is required to deposit duty deman ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
