9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 306X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wing confirmation of demand of Rs. 36,07,51,390/- on finalization of provisional assessment and most of which had been discharged, except for Rs. 4,79,41,410/- which was paid vide challan dated 27th March 2012, during the pendency of adjudication. Of the interest confirmed by the adjudicating authority, the first appellate authority had set aside Rs. 2,09,50,522/- by relying upon the decision of a Larger Bench of the Tribunal in Bimetal Bearings Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai [2008 (232) ELT 790 (Tri.-LB)] and all that now remains is the interest payable on the amount that had not been discharged till the completion of adjudication. 2. Learned Counsel for the appellant placed reliance on circular no. 354/66/2001-TRU dated 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e 9B and the averments as well as the documents to that effect produced by the assessee are found to be false or fabricated, then, the Tribunal shall initiate appropriate proceedings against the assessee.' 4. Learned Authorised Representative placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Company Ltd v. Union of India [2016-TIOL-2393-HC-AHM-CX]. 5. It would appear that the appellant had cleared intermediate goods during 1992-96, provisionally under rule 9B of Central Excise Rules, 1944, owing to dispute in valuation which came to be decided ultimately by the Hon'ble Supreme Court holding that cost of production was to be defined for the purpose in accordance with CAS-4 guidelines ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n in the case of Bimetal (supra) relating co provisions of Rule 9(b) as the same also deals with the provisions of Rule 7(4) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. Interest cannot, therefore, be charged prior to July 2001. In view of above, the Commissioner (Appeals) order upholding that the interest is chargeable for the entire period from 1-1-2000 to 31-12-2003 is partially set aside by holding that interest will be chargeable for the period 1-7-2001 to 31-12-2003 and not for the period prior to 1-7-2001. The appeal is disposed off accordingly.' 7. The Hon'ble High Court of Bombay, in re DGP Hinoday Industries Ltd, has clearly held that interest liability would arise only when the assessments were made provisional after the new rules came in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
