9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 693X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case, within 30 days (grace period) thereafter, with interest. But, for April, May and June 2008, the appellant did not pay duty in this manner. They paid duty from PLA for these three months on 04.08.2008 with interest, the delay of payment beyond the grace period being 92 days, 61 days and 30 days respectively. The relevant particulars of ayment of duty for the three months are as tabulated below: Month Ass. Value Duty Payable Cenvat duty paid PLA duty Date of Payment Delay in days Interest paid April 08 112250.00 15715.00 0.00 16186.00 04.08.08 92 698.00 May 08 427136.00 59799.04 0.00 61594.00 04.08.08 61 1996.00 June 08 187334.00 26226.76 0.00 27014.00 04.08.08 30 577.00 A manufacturer of excisable goods ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h regard to the demand of duty, the learned counsel submits that, as the appellant had cleared all the duty dues with interest prior to 5th of August 2008 for the period April to June 2008, their case is covered by Rule 8 (3) and not Rule 8 (3A). In other words, the argument is that the appellant was entitled to utilize CENVAT credit for payment of duty for the month of July 2008. Without prejudice to this argument, the learned counsel submits that, in terms of Rule 8 (3A), the appellant could at best be required to pay the aforesaid amount of duty from PLA and claim recredit of equal amount in CENVAT account. In this connection, reliance is placed on the Tribunal's decision in SCT Ltd. Vs. CCE, Meerut [2006 (202) E.L.T 814 (Tri.-Del.)] and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ould be made applicable to the facts of the present case in preference to Rule 8(3). It is not in dispute that, for the period April to June 2008, the assessee defaulted payments of duty beyond the grace period. The duty for this period was paid with interest on 04.08.2008. However, the assessee continued to be a defaulter for purposes of Rule 8(3A) and consequently became liable to pay duty on each clearance in July 2008, from the account current, without utilizing CENVAT credit. However CENVAT credit was utilized to the extent of Rs. 67,619/- for the entire month of July 2008. This was done on 23.08.2008. The original authority held this payment to be delayed by 18 days beyond 05.08.2008. obviously, the original authority treated 05.08.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
