9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 583X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t from the appellants - The appeal filed by the appellant to that extent is rejected. In view of the foregoing, the impugned order to the extent it confirms the demand of service tax liability and interest thereof is upheld and the appeal is disposed of. - APPEAL No.ST/433/12 - ORDER NO. A/90756/16/STB - Dated:- 8-9-2016 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Raju, Member (Technical) Shri. Kishore Kunal, Advocate for appellant Shri. S.R. Nair, EO (AR) for respondent Per: M.V. Ravindran 1. This appeal is directed against Order-in-Original No.68/STC-I/SKS/11-12 dated 27/03/2012 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise Customs (Appeals), Mumbai. 2. The issue that falls for consideration in this case is regar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arise only on default and whenever there is retrospective effect, it does not permit to create an offence retrospectively and demand of interest is quasi-criminal in nature. He relies upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Indore Vs. Premier Industries Ltd. - 2009 (248) ELT 833m CCE Indore Vs. Kriti Industries (India) Ltd. - 2016 (335) ELT 184 . For the proposition that retrospective amendment does not create any interest liability. 4. The DR on the other hand submits that the validating the provisions of Section 77 of the validation clause of Finance Act, 2010 mandates for recovery of service tax, interest or penalty or fine or other charges, hence, the demand of interest is correct. He would submit that in the case of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -produced clause (c) it mandates about recovery of service tax, interest, or penalty a fine or other charges which may not have been collected. As against such as specific clause which provides for recovery of interest, nothing survives in this appeal filed by the assessee for non-recovery of interest by the adjudicating authority. We do not find any reason to interfere in adjudicating authority s order for recovery of interest from the appellants. 7. The appeal filed by the appellant to that extent is rejected. In view of the foregoing, the impugned order to the extent it confirms the demand of service tax liability and interest thereof is upheld and the appeal is disposed of. (Operative part of the order pronounced in Court) - - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
