9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 248X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rvice Tax, Mumbai Vs. Toyo Engineering Corpn. Ltd. [2014 (10) TMI 475 - CESTAT MUMBAI], where it was held that merely because the credit is available in the books of account does not mean that the tax has been paid. Therefore, the liability to pay interest has to be computed from the due date of payment of tax to the actual date of payment - appeal rejected - decided against appellant. - Service ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the interest amount. 4. The Ld. Commissioner in the de novo order dated 20th June, 2008, rectified the calculation mistake and calculated the interest liability vide annexure (i) and (ii) of the impugned order. The appellants filed appeal against the impugned order on the ground that the Ld. Commissioner has erred in calculating the date of delay as the revised date is 30th May, 2007, the date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whereby the demand of tax and interest was confirmed and only matter was remanded for rectifying some calculation mistakes. There is a delay in payment of tax, therefore Appellant are liable to pay statutory interest as the same has been confirmed by the Tribunal vide final order dated-23/11/2007. In these circumstances we find no merit in the Appeal itself. The appeal is dismissed. Stay petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant) 14/09/2015 (None appeared on behalf of appellant and adjourned),10/11/2015 None appeared on behalf of appellant and adjourned as per request of Ld. A.R.), 04/02/2016 (None appeared on behalf of appellant and adjourned), On 05/08/2016 the matter was adjourned) 7. Heard the Ld. A.R. and on perusal on the appeal records I find that the Ld. A.R. relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax were 5/9/2006 and 5/2/2007, there are delays of 102 days and 10 days in payment of tax and for these delays, the respondent is certainly liable to pay interest. In the above case, the coordinate Bench has held that merely because the credit is available in the books of account does not mean that the tax has been paid. Therefore, the liability to pay interest has to be computed from the due ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
