Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (11) TMI 1030

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ax Appeal No. 318 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 24-10-2013 - M. R. Shah And Sonia Gokani,JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. BR Tripathi, Advocate With Mr. Maharshi V. Patel, Advocate For the Respondent : Ms. Amee Yajnik, Advocate ORDER (Per : Honourable Mr. Justice M. R. Shah) [1.0] Present tax appeal has been preferred by the appellant assessee challenging the impugned judgment and order dated 24.09.2012 passed by the learned Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as CESTAT ) in Appeal No.1447 to 1449/WZB/AHD/2012 as well as the common order dated 07.02.2013 passed in Rectification Application No.E/MA/2326/2012 with the following proposed substantial question of law. 1. Whether the Tribun .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and were availing the benefit of the credit of duty paid inputs used in the manufacture of the final product. During audit under EA2000 it revealed that the appellants had cleared the goods at Nil rate of duty under Notification No.64/95CE dated 16.03.1995 as amended to M/s ISRo, Shriharikota. It appeared that they had not maintained separate inventory for duty paid inputs received in the factory for use in the manufacture of both dutiable as well as non dutiable final products as required under Rule 57AD(2) of Central Excise Rules, 1944 and also they have not paid an amount equal to 8% of the value of clearances of non dutiable goods at the time of clearances of such goods as envisaged under Rule 57AD(2)( .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... earned Tribunal it was undertaken by the assessee to reverse the said amount of Rs.10,206/within 30 days [which subsequently they have reversed]. The learned Tribunal has disposed of the said appeals by further observing that the interest liability upon the assessee would be from the date of insertion of the provision of Sections 82 and 83 of Finance Act, 2005. [2.3] It appears that thereafter the assessee preferred miscellaneous application before the learned CESTAT and by order dated 07.02.2013, the learned CESTAT has dismissed the said rectification application by observing that there is no mistake in the order and/or the mistake committed by the Tribunal nor can it be said that it is apparent from the records. [2.4] Feeling aggrieve .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ective amendment carried out by the provisions of Sections 82 and 83 of the Finance Act, 2005. In our view, at least from that day, the respondent is required to discharge the interest liability. We uphold the order of original adjudicating authority as regards confirmation of interest on the amounts already reversed by the assessee. Though learned counsel for the appellant vehemently contended that the Tribunal ought to have rejected the department s appeal in toto including on the aspect of amount already reversed by the appellants, we are of the opinion that such aspect cannot be examined in this appeal. Since the appellant had voluntarily reversed the amount, there was no question for the Tribunal to decide such an issue. However, as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e is not liable to pay the interest. No other submissions have been made. [5.0] Heard Shri B.R. Tripathi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and perused the impugned common judgment and order passed by the learned CESTAT in Appeal Nos. 1447 to 1449/2012 as well as the order passed in rectification application. At the outset it is required to be noted that by passing the order earlier on 17.04.2013, the Division Bench of this Court issued notice upon the respondent only for the purpose to consider the issue with respect to interest liability under sections 82 and 83 of the Finance Act, 2005 and as such refused to entertain the appeal on other issues with respect to the liability of the appellant whether the appellant was .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates