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 (9) TMI 240

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... oner is the manufacturer of steel products. When the premises of the petitioner was inspected on 3-10-1990, the Excise Authorities found that the petitioner had removed certain manufactured goods without payment of excise duty as required under the law. This led to issuance of show cause notice to the petitioner which was replied. Thereafter, the Collector, Central Excise passed an order on 12-12-1991 confirming duty payment of Rs. 43,909/- on 69.695 MT of CTD Bars removed under Gate Passes No. 511 to 517 of dated 1-10-1991 as also confirming a duty demand of Rs. 1,37,846.62 and Rs. 6,80,207.47 on 218.720 MT of CTD bars/channels/flats and angles and 1504.765 MT of CTD bars/rounds/angles and 96.240 MT of M.S. Flats, said to be cleared by the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... amount of duty is first determined to be payable. Therefore, the liability for payment of interest on delayed payment of duty under Section 11AA of the Act arose only on 22-5-1998 and not before that. Therefore, the respondents had authority to recover interest on delayed payment, only for the period from 22-8-1998 and not earlier. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 submitted that determination had already taken place by the Collector when he passed the order on 12-12-1991. Out of total amount of Rs. 8,18,054.09, the petitioner had paid only Rs. 5,50,000/- on 28-6-1993 and the balance amount of Rs. 2,68,054.09 was paid as late as on 24-10-1998. Therefore, the delay occurred in paying the balance amount for .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... able with duty determined under sub-section (2) of Section 11A before the date on which the Finance Bill, 1995 receives the assent of the President, fails to pay such duty within three months from such date, then, such person shall be liable to pay interest under this section from the date immediately after three months from such date, till the date of payment of such duty. Explanation 1. - Where the duty determined to be payable is reduced by the Commissioner (Appeals), Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal or, as the case may be, the court, the date of such determination shall be the date on which an amount of duty is first determined to be payable. Explanation 2. - Where the duty determined to be payable is increased or further inc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal or, as the case may be, the court, the date of such determination shall be the date on which an amount of duty is first determined to be payable. Applying the aforesaid provision in the manner as indicated above, this Court finds that though at the first instance, the Collector passed order on 12-12-1991, confirming the duty, the order was assailed in appeal. Finally, the Tribunal vide its order dated 22-5-1998 allowed the appeal partly, by which the duty was reduced by an amount of Rs. 43,909/- as indicated in Para 4 of the appellate order. Therefore, in the present case, provisions contained in Explanation 1 would be attracted, according to which, the date of such determination shall be the date on whi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ppellate authority or the Tribunal or the Court passes an order resulting in increase or further increase in the duty. 9. In view of above analysis, the date with reference to which petitioner's liability for payment of interest on delayed payment of duty has to be reckoned would be the date on which the appellate Tribunal passed the order reducing the duty i.e. on 22-5-1998 and not the 12-12-1991. 10. If that be so, proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 11AA of the Act of 1944 on its application shows that the petitioner failed to pay duty within three months from the date of determination by the Tribunal. The order of the Tribunal passed on 22-5-1998. The petitioner was, therefore, under an obligation to pay the amount of duty .....

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