9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 356X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ommissioner v. SKF India Ltd. - 2009 (239) E.L.T. 385 (S.C.) which has settled the issue in this regard. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants had raised supplementary invoices on their OE customers on account of price revision of goods supplied to them with retrospective effect. The appellants had discharged Central Excise duty on such supplementary invoices, but they had not paid any interest on such differential duty eventhough the price revision pertained to clearances made much earlier to the date of raising such supplementary invoices. The department had, therefore, issued impugned SCNs in respect of various units of the appellant company demanding interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment or as ascertained by a Central Excise Officer and inform the Central Excise Officer in writing about the payment made by him and in that event he would not be given the demand notice under sub-section (1). But Explanation 2 to the sub-section makes it expressly clear that such payment would not be exempt from interest chargeable under Section 11AB, that is, for the period from the first date of the month succeeding the month in which the duty ought to have been paid till the date of payment, of the duty. What is stated in Explanation 2 to sub-section (2B) is reiterated in Section 11AB that states where any duty of excise has not been levied or paid or has been short levied or short paid or erroneously refunded, the person who has paid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid/levied is short. Both, the Commissioner (Appeals) and the CESTAT have observed that the Assessee paid the duty on its own accord immediately when the revised rates became known to them from their customers. The differential duty was due at that time i.e. when the revised rates applicable with retrospective effect were learnt by the Assessee, which was much after the clearance of the goods and therefore, question of payment of interest does not arise as the duty was paid as soon as it was learnt that it was payable. Finding that provisions of Section 11A(2) and 11A(2B) were not applicable as the situation occurred in the instant, case was quite different. Section 11AB(1) was not at all applicable, and therefore, the Assessee was not requ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Commissioner v. BHEL - 2010 (257) E.L.T. 369 (Kar.) which had distinguished the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the ground that on the date of clearance, there was no escalation and hence no interest payable. However, we find that subsequently, Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of C.C.E., Bangalore-III v. Presscom Products - 2011 (268) E.L.T. 344 (Kar.) has distinguished its earlier order in the case of BHEL (supra) and has followed the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SKF India Ltd. (supra). It has been held therein that assessee was liable to pay interest for duty paid after clearance of goods, eventhough the non-payment was not intentional. We are of the considered view that the ratio of the Hon'ble ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
