9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (9) TMI 651X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Rao, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. - This misc. application for ROM has been filed in respect of the Final Order Nos. 714 to 719/2007 dated 28-6-2007 passed by this Bench. 2. Shri Laxminarayan Goyal, the learned Consultant, appeared on behalf of the applicants and Shri V.P.C. Rao, the learned SDR, for the Revenue. 3. We heard both sides. 4. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ara 11(iii) page 24 and also in page 26 (lines 8 and 9) of the order. This is only a typographical error. The same can be corrected. Hence, instead of 15-6-1999, it should be read as 15-9-1999. 5.1 The second mistake, which has been pointed out is as follows:-In the Final Order in para 12(v), at the end, it has been stated that Interest will be charged while disposing of the appeals. It was su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... demand relates to earlier period prior to introduction of proviso to sec. 11AB and SCN was issued on 8-10-2001 i.e. after introduction of Proviso to Sec. 11AB. Applicants are not liable for any payment of interest for the earlier period prior to 11-5-2001 as SCN is issued on 8-10-2001 raising the duty demand. 5. However, ignoring the above submissions, the Hon ble Bench ordered for payment of in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
