9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 938X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xpiry of 03 months from 30.07.2018, and any interest paid before such date shall be liable to be recovered from the respondent. 20. The interest paid to the respondent on the penalty amounting to Rs 3,28,218/- is also not supported by any provision of law and is liable to be recovered from the respondent. 21. The payment of interest on the deposit of Rs 22,61,177/- as interest for which an amount Rs 3,51,257/- was paid by the Asstt. Commissioner in his order is liable to be recovered from the respondent. 22. Accordingly, the order of the Asstt. Commissioner dated 01.10.2019 is set aside to the extent that it granted interest on the duty deposited (Rs 64,04,685/-) from the date of deposit, instead of granting interest from the expiry o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the penalty (Rs 16,01,177/-). 2.5 Appellant challenged this order before the Commissioner (Appeals), who vide his order in appeal dated 27.06.2019 allowed the appeal of the appellant, by holding as follows:- "In view of the above discussion and findings, the impugned order is modified and the refund of Rs.16,01,171/- (deposited towards 25% of penalty imposed) is allowed alongwith tile applicable interest from the date of deposit. The appellant is also allowed interest on the amount of refunds of Rs.86,65,862/- already sanctioned vide impugned order, from the date (s) of deposit of said amount till the date of payment." 2.6 In pursuance of the order in appeal dated 27.06.2019, Assistant Commissioner vide his order in original dated 0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deposit of said amount till the date of payment. The appeal bearing No 1729/CE/Noida/App/NOI/2018-19 dated 17.12.2018 filed by M/s Sree India Surgical Pvt Ltd., Delhi Road, Pilkhuwa, Hapur is accordingly allowed with consequential relief." The Draft order OIO found in order and pre audited to the extent of amount proposed in the draft OIO i.e. 16.01.171/- + 19,69,707/- (intt) = 35,70,878/-."" After making enquiries from the Assistant Commissioner (Review) and after pre audit of the refund order/ claim, Assistant Commissioner allowed the refund staging as follows: "I hereby sanction refund of Rs 16,01,171/- (Rs Sixteen Lacs One Thousand One Hundred and Seventy One only) and interest @ 6% amounting to Rs 16,41,489/- + Rs 3,28,218/- the to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ugned order. 4.1 I have considered the impugned order along with the submissions made in the appeal and during the course of arguments. 4.2 The facts as stated above are not in dispute. Both the parties agreed that the Order-in-Appeal dated 27/06/2019 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) was not appealed against, when no appeal by revenue, this order has become final even if the said order was erroneous or that view was possible in the matter. It is settled law that the Assistant Commissioner was bound by the order of the higher Appellate Authority and if he had taken any view contrary to the above said order, the said order would have passed in contempt of the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) which is contrary to the principle of judi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .5 Further, Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CTM Textile Mills Vs Union of India 2009 (246) ELT 148 (Guj) has held as follows:- "15. The challenge to consequential order dated 4-1-2006 made by the Adjudicating Authority pursuant to order made by the Tribunal is not required to be entertained on merits considering the fact that the said order is not an independent order made for the first time. The said order had already been made on 5-6-2003. It was only because the intervening order dated 19-09-2003 of Commissioner (Appeals), that the Adjudicating Authority was required to pass consequential order once again on 4-1-2006 pursuant to order made by the Tribunal. In the circumstances, once the order of Tribunal had attained finality ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellate tribunal. 8. From the aforementioned provisions of the Act the position is clear that any order passed by an authority under the Act is appealable to the Collector (Appeals) and a further appeal to the appellate tribunal against the order of the Collector (Appeals) is also provided in section 35. The hierarchy of authorities for adjudication and determination of a matter relevant for charging the excise duty is for a purpose. It is not an empty formality. Classification of the goods manufactured by an assessee is important for the purpose of levy and collection of excise duty. Under Rule 173B every assessee is required to file with the proper officer a list of goods manufactured by him for approval and the proper officer sha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
