Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2005 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2005 (5) TMI 90 - CESTAT, NEW DELHIInterest - Appellate Tribunal's power - Whether interest on delayed payment of interest is permissible under the provisions of Central Excise Act or not - HELD THAT:- It has not been disputed before us that Section 214 of the Income Tax Act relates to the payment of advance tax by an assessee and when the tax so paid had been found to be excess at the time of final assessment that has to be refunded by the department with interest. But no such provision regarding payment of duty in advance by the assessee, exists in the Central Excise Act. Rather duty is payable by an assessee at the time of clearance of the goods from the factory. The Central Excise Act only speaks of provisional assessment under Rule 9B which can be claimed by the assessee or adopted by the deptt., when there is dispute regarding classification of the goods, and the correct Tariff rate of duty leviable on these goods or, where the clearance of the goods has to be made by an assessee under an agreement containing price variation clause. It is only on finalisation of that provisional assessment, the excess found duty, if any is required to be refunded to the assessees by the department and even for that refund period of three months has been allowed to the revenue u/s 11BB of the Act. On the basis of the above referred two judgments of the Gujarat High Court in Chimanlal S. Patel v. CIT [1993 (10) TMI 20 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT], D.J. Works v. Deputy CIT [1991 (10) TMI 33 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] and Narendra Doshi [2001 (7) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT], which are under different Tax statute, interest on delayed payment of interest, cannot be held to be permissible under the Central Excise Act and the Rules made thereunder, for want of any specific provision in the Act or the Rules. Therefore, the Tribunal has no power to award such a interest to the assessee. The law laid down in Hindustan Motors v. CCE [2003 (3) TMI 166 - CEGAT, KOLKATA], to the contrary, being not a good law, stands overruled. The reference stands accordingly answered. With the consent of both the sides, we dispose of the appeal itself as no other issue is involved therein. Thus, the appeal raising claim for interest on interest paid late, filed by the appellants, has no merit and is dismissed.
|