9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 666X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... resent appeal is squarely covered by the decision of this Court [2013 (10) TMI 30 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT ] (Commissioner, Central Excise Commissionerate v. M/s VAE VKN Industries Pvt. Limited), , wherein identical issue has been decided in favour of the assessee and against the revenue - respondent is unable to dispute the applicability of the said judgment - Decided in favour of assessee. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944? 2. A few facts relevant for the decision of the controversy involved, as narrated in the appeal, may be noticed. The assessee company is engaged in the manufacture of LPG cylinders falling under Chapter Heading 7311 of the Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. On 3.12.1996, the Central Excise Preventive Staff of Delhi IV visited the factory pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant filed appeal before the Tribunal. Vide order 25.9.2001, the Tribunal confirmed the demand but reduced the amount of penalty from ₹ 10,55,833/- to ₹ 5,00,000/-. On 28.1.2008, the respondent issued a show cause notice to the appellant raising demand of interest. The appellant filed its reply to the notice. Vide order dated 12.9.2008, Annexure A.2, the adjudicating authorit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. It has been recorded therein as under:- 6. There is no dispute that assessee has paid the differential duty on supplementary invoices regularly and has shown the same in the ER-1 returns, which were filed regularly before the department, therefore, issuance of show cause notice for interest on the delayed payment should also be within a peri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
