2015 (4) TMI 488

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the final order of the Hon ble Supreme Court fixing liability to pay the principal amount. Further, I find from the plain reading of Rule 7 (4) that the liability to pay interest arises consequent to determination of amount payable on finalisation of provisional assessment. In the present case, the appellant has admittedly paid the differential duty prior to finalisation of provisional assessment. Further, I find that the issue is entirely covered by the ruling of Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ispat Industries Ltd. (2010 (10) TMI 178 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT ). - Decided in favour of assessee.
Anil Choudhary, Member (J),J. For the Appellant : Ms Anjali Hirawat, Adv. For the Respondent : Shri Ashutosh Nath, Asst. Commissioner (A .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f the month succeeding the month for which such amount is determined, till the date of payment thereof." 3.1 The learned Counsel for appellant argued that from a plain reading of the provisions, it is clear that the interest is payable from the first day of month succeeding the month for which such amount is finally determined, till the date of payment. Thus consequent to determination, assessee is liable to pay interest on any amount payable, on order for final assessment under sub-rule 3 of Rule 7. The appellant further relies on the ruling of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur vs. Ispat Industries Ltd. - 2010 (259) ELT 662 (Bom) of which para 2 & 3 are reproduced as below:- "2. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he impugned order and allowing of the appeal. 4. The learned A.R., states that as the liability of duty is on monthly basis and payable at end of the month, accordingly, interest has been collected on monthly basis for the short paid tax. He further, relies on the ruling of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Premier Ltd. vs. Union of India - Writ Petition No. 1915 of 2013 being order dated 29.09.2014 which is reported at and accordingly prays for dismissal of the appeal. 5. Having considered the rival contentions, and perusing the records, I find that the ruling in the case of Premier Ltd. vs. Union of India (supra), is not applicable in facts of this appeal. It is a case of demand for interest, which does not arise purely from .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X