9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 822X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... limited purpose of quantifying the interest, under the respective provisions, for the period prior to 11-5-2001 and after 11-5-2001. Pursuant to the said remand order, the adjudicating authority has quantified the interest as Rs. 38,81,792/- for the period prior to 11-5-2001 and Rs. 6,27,339/- for the period after 11-5-2001. We find from the records that the appellant had at no point of time challenged the leviability of interest under Section 11AA or Section 11AB as directed by the revisionary authority, before any other higher forum. The learned advocate for the appellant had submitted that in the present appeal, they are challenging both the quantification as well as leviability of interest. We do not find merit in the said submission of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interest on the duty paid for whatsoever reason and the circumstances narrated under proviso to Section 35B, are independent of each other and hence, this Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear the appeal. In support, he has referred to the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Madura Coats Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Madurai - 2012 (284) E.L.T. 235 (Tri.-Chennai). 4. Heard both sides and perused the records. We find that the applicant had preferred a revision application before the Government of India challenging the demand of duty confirmed on the loss of goods in transit and also the levy of interest, confirmed by the lower authorities. The revisionary authority after detailed discussion of all issues raised including levy of interest under Secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osing the revision application filed by the appellant earlier under Section 35EE of CEA, 1944 would result in sitting in appeal on the said Revision Order, which, in our opinion, is neither appropriate nor permissible under the provision of law. 5. We find that the observation of the single Member of the Tribunal in Madura Coat s case (supra) is not applicable to the facts of the present case, as in the said case the refund/rebate settled was delayed and for the delay in getting the refund, the appellant has approached the department claiming interest under Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In that context, the Tribunal has held that asking of interest for the period of delay in getting the refund and/or rebate are two differ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
