9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 277X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er Bench in the Kumaran Arch Tech Pvt. Ltd. case (2013 (4) TMI 482 - CESTAT NEW DELHI). Therefore, the ratio of the said decision would squarely apply. Accordingly, we hold that there is no need to include the cess again on the Excise duty equal to the aggregate of the Customs duty and, therefore, the impugned demands are not sustainable in law. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r and above the duty calculated aggregate to customs duty on the like goods. Accordingly, he confirmed a duty demand of ₹ 4,84,274/- along with interest thereon and also upheld the imposition of equivalent amount of penalty on the appellant. 2. The miscellaneous application is with regard the stay order passed by this Tribunal vide order dated 07.12.2012. Inspite of the stay granted to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ms duty leviable on like goods imported into India as provided for under Section 3 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Larger Bench held that since cess is taken into account while computing the CVD element of the Customs duty and again cess is included in the aggregate of the Customs duty, the question of adding cess for the third time while computing the Excise duty would not arise. Therefore, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
