9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 749X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom 29.04.2010, made in the Third Schedule read with the Twelfth Schedule to the Central Excise Act, 1944, by inserting Entry No. 100A in the said Schedule vide Section 73 read with the Twelfth Schedule to the Finance Act, 2011, which came into force on 08.04.2011, interest should be calculated from the date of the enactment of the Finance Bill, 2011 i.e. 08.04.2011 till the date of actual payment of the differential duty i.e. 31.05.2011 and not from the due date of payment of the differential duty i.e. 29.04.2010 till the date of actual payment?" 3. This Appeal was first heard on 20th August, 2018. At that time, the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Star India (P). Ltd. v/. Commissioner of Central Excise 2005 (7) SCC 203 was ci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 2018 was not yet signed. Therefore, we would need to rehear the appeal for admission. This was agreed to by the Counsel. 4. Thus, the appeal itself, at the request of the parties, was kept on board for reconsideration on 27th August, 2018. 5. On 27th August, 2018 we passed the following order: " This Appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, challenges the order dated 26th May, 2016 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). 2. The basic question urged by the Revenue for our consideration, is as under: " Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right in holding that where duty became payable consequent upon retrospective amendment with effec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ber, 2018." 6. Ms. Cardozo, learned Counsel for the Revenue tenders a copy of the order dated 26th February, 2009, admitting the Revenue's Appeal. She further informs us on instructions, that the Appeal is still awaiting final disposal before the Madhya Pradesh High Court. 7. Mr. Nankani, learned Senior Counsel, while opposing the Appeal, seeks to rely upon the Finance Act, 2002 and contend that it does not have any validation clause. Thus, there is no difference with the Finance Act, 2011 which arises for consideration in this appeal. Reliance is also placed upon the Explanatory Notes to Finance Act, 2002 to contend that the amendment in Finance Act, 2002, was clarificatory. 8. On the other hand, we find that the Apex Court in Star ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
