Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2011 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (11) TMI 569 - AT - Central ExciseDemand of differential duty - Rule 8 of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 2000 - Held that:- Respondent-assessee had discharged their duty liability on the machine parts cleared to their sister concern, based upon their understanding of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, they discharged the differential duty before the issuance of show cause notice and also filed returns with revenue authorities. In our considered view, there was no fraud, collusion or mis-statement for suppression of the fact as the goods which were cleared from the factories to their sister concerns, the recipient unit is eligible to avail Cenvat credit of the duty paid on such machinery parts - provisions of Section 11AB were very clear that any duty liability discharged by an assessee, interest liability automatically arises - respondents are directed to pay the interest on the amount of differential duty discharged by them and the appeal filed by Revenue to that extent is allowed while the appeal against the impugned order in respect of setting aside of the penalty and setting aside of the confiscation is rejected - Decided partly in favour of Revenue.
|