9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 514X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the issue of supplementary invoices is subjected to the bar of limitation. Impugned order set aside - appeal allowed. - E/973/2012 - Final Order No. 21082 / 2016 - Dated:- 8-11-2016 - Shri S. S. Garg, Judicial Member Shri S.R. Savant, Advocate For the Appellant Smt. Ezhilmathi, AR For the Respondent ORDER Per S. S. Garg The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 14.3.2012. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant is a manufacturer of CI castings falling under Chapter 73 of CETA. The customers place orders for castings for a period from one year to 2 year as per the price agreed upon which is specified in the purchase order. During the period of operation, cost of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Paramount Rubber Industries vs. CCE, Delhi reported in 2012 (275) E.L.T. 98 wherein it has been held that the demand for interest on differential duty paid consequence to the issue of supplementary invoices is subjected to the bar of limitation. 4.1 Similar issue has also been considered in the following case laws: (a) M/s. UCAL Fuel Systems Ltd. vs. CCE reported in 2010-TIOL-127-CESTAT-MAD. (b) CC vs. T.V.S. Whirlpool Ltd. reported in 1996 (86) E.L.T. 144 upheld by the Hon ble Supreme Court as reported in 2000 (119) E.L.T. A177 (S.C.) 5. On the other hand, the learned DR submitted that there is no time limit specified under Section 11A for recovery of interest which is automatic. Further, the identical issue has been consi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Auto Ltd.: 2010 (250) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.). However, the apex court in the case of Steel Authority of India Ltd. vs. CCE, Raipur: 2015 (326) E.L.T. 450 (S.C.) has proposed that the question of chargeability of interest is to be referred to Larger Bench of the Apex Court. However since the issue is pending, the legal position is not in doubt that the interest is liable to be paid from the date of original clearance of goods till the date of payment of differential duty on supplementary invoices. 6.2 Now we turn to the specific argument of the appellant saying that the show-cause notice is hit by time-bar inasmuch as it has been issued on 20.01.2010 for the period June 2007 to December 2007. The learned DR has argued that there is no time lim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
