9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1611X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been issued beyond the expiry of normal limitation period of one year, the demand as such is time-barred - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ential duty which came to ₹ 23,00,374/-. However a Show Cause Notice dated 16-2-2005 was issued to them that though they have paid the differential duty on the basis of their own ascertainment of their duty liability under Section 11A(2B), they should also pay interest on this duty under Section 11AB for the period on delay and accordingly this Show Cause Notice demanded interest on duty. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is in excess of their duty liability, the interest demand would not survive. Against this order of the Commissioner (Appeals), the Revenue is in appeal. 2. Heard both the sides. 3. Sh. B.B. Sharma, the learned DR, assailed the impugned order by reiterating the grounds of appeal and pleaded that Commissioner (Appeals)'s order adjusting dropping the interest demand by permitting its adju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he limitation period which applies to the demand of short-paid/non-paid duty would also apply to demand of the interest thereon and that in view of this, interest demand being time-barred would not survive and as such there is no infirmity in the impugned order. 5. We have considered the submissions from both the sides and perused the records. There is no dispute that in view of judgment of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
