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

2014 (6) TMI 855

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ETA, 1985. During the relevant period i.e. from July, 1996 to March, 2001, they had supplied these goods to M/s. General Motors of India, Gujarat. In the manufacture of these goods, they have used Moulds supplied free of cost by M/s. General Motors of India. The cost of the said free issue materials were not included in the value of finished goods. The Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Mutual Industries Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise, Mumbai reported in 2000 (117) E.L.T. 578 (Tribunal) has held that in the event Moulds were supplied free of cost by customers and used in the manufacture of finished goods, then proportionate cost of Moulds are to be included in the assessable value of finished goods. Consequently, the Appella .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ELT 286 (Tri-Mumbai) wherein it has been laid down that interest under Sub-Section(1) of Section 11AA or under Section 11 AB of CEA, 1944 in the amended form cannot be charged before the said date. Further, he has submitted that inclusion of the value of moulds supplied free of cost by the customers, in the value of finished goods has been interpreted differently by different Benches of the Tribunal and the law was not settled in this regard. The dispute was finally set at rest by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in 2001 in the case of Mutual Industries Ltd. case (supra). Therefore, no penalty could be imposed on them under Section 11AC of CEA,1994 as there has been no suppression of facts nor any mis-declaration. In support he has referre .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ds. The short question needs to be determined is whether interest under Section 11AB of CEA, 1944 is attracted on account of the major portion of differential duty paid in July, 2001 and balance in March, 2003 for the clearances effected during July, 1996 to March, 2001. Undisputedly, the differential duty becomes payable as the value of free issue moulds were not included in the value of manufactured finished goods supplied by the appellant to General Motors India Ltd. The contention of the appellant is that the liability to interest under Section 11AB would be restricted for the period after 11/05/2001 in view of the amendment to Section 11AB of CEA, 1944.In contrast, the Revenue issued demand notice calculating interest from July, 1996 t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Act in as much as sub-section (1) of Section 11AA opens with the clause subject to the provision of Section 11AB. In the result, interest can be levied on that part of the amount of duty which pertains to the period from 11/5/2001 to 30/6//2001. This liability, obviously, is unaffected by the fact that such duty was paid within the period of 3 months prescribed under Section 11AA (1). It is, therefore, held that the appellant is liable to pay interest under Section 11AB of the Act on that part of the amount of duty which pertains to the period from 11/5/01 to 30/6/01 and such interest shall be paid for the period from the due date to the date of payment (20/4/02). 6. This decision has been followed in the subsequent case of Godrej & Boy .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... demand of interest in the impugned order is not in accordance with the law. Hence, we set aside the demand of interest. Thus, the appeal is allowed in the above terms. 7. On the other hand, the Ld. A.R. for the Revenue referred to the recent decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Commr. of Central Excise, Pune Vs. SKF India Ltd. (Supra) and International Auto Ltd. (Supra). On careful analysis of the said decisions, I find that the question of levy of interest involved in those cases relates to the demands payable for the period after 11/05/2001 and the issue was not whether interest would be charged for the period prior to 11/05/2001 or thereafter ,the ratio of the above decisions are not applicable to the facts of t .....

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