Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2011 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (3) TMI 1132 - CESTAT, DELHIFacility of filing ER-1 return on quarterly basis availed - as per revenue it is contravention of the provisions of Rule 12 of the said Rules - dept. confirmed the demand of interest and imposed penalty - Held that:- As decided in Lucid Colloids case [2005 (8) TMI 134 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR] to the extent rule provides other than the rate of interest as an alternative mode of levy of interest per day not connected with the amount of duty in default is beyond the enabling power of the Parent Act and has further held that Rule 8(3) to the extent it provides levy of interest @ Rs. 1,000/- which is higher as alternative to charge of interest @ 2% on the amount of duty means to be understood as 24% p.a. on the amount of duty in default is ultra vires to Section 11AB of the Act and cannot be sustained and is held inoperative. Apparently, the authority below was not justified in confirming the demand of interest @ Rs. 1,000/- per day for the relevant period. Thus matter is remanded to the Commissioner to recalculate the interest bearing in mind the law applicable to the facts of the case and the decision of the Rajasthan High Court. As regards the penalty is concerned there is no finding either by the authority below to the effect that the delay in payment of duty was with intention to evade the duty. In the absence of any such finding, obviously, the penalty under Rule 25(d) is not sustainable as rightly pointed out by the appellants. The penalty can be justified in terms of Rule 27 of the said rules and maximum limit thereunder is Rs. 5,000/- and not Rs. 20,000/-.
|