2009 (5) TMI 776

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... K.S. Srinivasa, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T) (Oral)]. - These appeals have been filed in respect of the following orders-in-appeal. (1) Order-in-Appeal No. 41/2007 (V-II) CE dated 22-8-2007, and (2) Order-in-Appeal Nos. 30-31/2007 (V-II) CE dated 8-8-2007. 2. The details are given in the following tabular column. Appeal No. Order-in-Appeal No. Dut .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... roceeded against the appellants proposing inclusion of the penal interest collected, in the assessable value. The Original Authority confirmed the demands. The appellants approached the Commissioner (A) for relief. The Commissioner (A) also upheld the orders of the Original Authority. While taking such a decision, the learned Commissioner has distinguished the facts of the case-laws in the case of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Therefore, the ratip of the Arvind Mills case is clearly applicable to the present cases. Moreover, this Bench in the appellant's own case vide Final Order Nos. 78-80/2007 dated 4-1-2007 [2007 (220) E.L.T. 408 (Tribunal)] had dealt with the same issue and held that penal interest is not includable in the assessable value. Following the ratio of the same, we allow the appeals with consequential re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X