2017 (6) TMI 150

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ore finalization of provisional assessment - Held that: - Since differential duty was voluntarily paid before finalization of assessments which did not result in any dues and payable to the Govt, the interest was not leviable. If the interest was payable on the duty on which the assessee paid differential duty prior to finalization of assessment, then the Central Excise rules 2002 would have specifically said so - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Shri S. S. Garg, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Mr. N. Anand Adv For the Respondent : Ms Ezhil Mathi, A. R ORDER Per S. S. Garg The present appeal is directed against impugned order dated 20.4.2009 whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the order-in-original and r .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f ₹ 1,84,860/_ and appropriated, interest of ₹ 25,729/- was demanded and the fact of excess payment of duty for which appellant undertook not to claim refund was taken into record. 3. Aggrieved by the order-in-original appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner who rejected the appeal of the appellant and hence the present appeal. 4. Heard both the parties and perused the records. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without considering the judgements of the High Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India which has been decided in favour of the assessee. He further submitted that the issue is no longer resintegra and has been settled in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n pursuance of the final assessment order, if still the assessee is due in any duty, then for the short fall in payment of duty, the assessee is liable to pay interest." Further learned counsel for the appellant submitted that in the case of CEAT Ltd Vs CCE [ 2014 (317) ELT 192 (Bom) ], the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay has also held in favour of the assessee. The judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court was taken to the Hon'ble Supreme court by the Department and the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the same on merits and upheld the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court has held that it was not possible to read in the Central Excise Rules 2002, the liability to pay interest for the period between provisi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X