9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 14X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iew the findings of the first appellate authority are correct that there is no dispute that appellant-assessee himself come forward requesting the department to issue show-cause notice, so that they can discharge the duty liability, I find that there is no merit in the appeal - Appeal rejected. - Appeal No. E/1447 & 1467/10-Mum - - - Dated:- 1-11-2016 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Shri N.N. Prabhudesai, Superintendent (A.R.) for the Appellant Shri Rajesh Ostwal, Advocate for the Respondent ORDER Per M. V. Ravindran These two appeals are filed by the appellant-assessee as well as the Revenue against Order-in-Appeal No. M-I/PAP/167/2010 dated 29.04.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osed by the adjudicating authority but upheld the demand and interest. 3. The appellant-assessee is an appeal against the impugned order demanding interest while the Revenue is in appeal against setting aside the penalty by the lower authority. 4. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant-assessee would draw our attention to the findings recorded by the first appellate authority. It is his submission that the first appellate authority has clearly recorded that no evidence produced by the department to establish that the appellant had delayed payment of Excise duty hence the demand of interest under provision of Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act needs to be set aside. He would submit that the appeal filed by the Revenue for upho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n that the provision of Central Excise Act more specifically, Section 11AB is for demand of interest on the amount of Central Excise duty which have been confirmed and paid by an assessee. Appellant has himself voluntarily discharged the duty liability, that does not mean there would be no interest liability, as provision of Section 11AB were specifically amended to include such a situation, accordingly it is held that the appeal filed by the appellant is liable to be rejected and I do so. As regards the appeal filed by the Revenue against the order which have set aside the penalties, I find that the first appellate authority while setting aside penalty on the appellant, recorded following finding. Therefore, anyone or more of the ingr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e were conflicting decisions as regard to availability of SSI exemption to the goods which were sold with a brand name of foreign person or trader; that further the clearance value in each year during the material periods was within the exemption limit as could be seen from the total clearance value of ₹ 1,03,29,530/- furnished by the appellant, in view of the fact that SSI exemption was available to a person, whose value of clearance in the preceding financial year is upto ₹ 3 crores starting from the year 1999 onwards in terms of Notification No. 8/1999 dated 28.2.1999. Further, as contended by the appellant, there were conflicting decisions in regard to availability of SSI exemption in cases where the goods cleared with forei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
