Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 453 - AT - Central ExciseValuation - cost construction method - whether the penalty u/s 11AC and interest u/s 11AB is chargeable in the fact that the differential duty was payable due to variation in the value arose because the correct cost of raw material was not available at the time of clearance of the goods to the respondent as the same was being provided by the principal of the respondent? - Held that: - there is no malafide on the part of the respondent - The short payment of duty is not due to the malafide intention of the respondent but for the reason the principal manufacturer has not provided the correct cost of material timely to the respondent - penalty u/s 11AC is not imposable. Interest - Held that: - interest is unavoidable as the same is in the nature of piggyback of the duty. It was admitted that duty was paid belatedly therefore for the delay the interest payment is inevitable - demand of interest upheld. Appeal allowed - decided partly in favor of appellant.
|