TMI Blog2005 (7) TMI 462X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - In this appeal the revenue has contested the correctness of the impugned order vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the payment of interest of Rs. 10,824/- to the respondents. 2.None has come present on behalf of the respondents. No request for adjournment has also been received from them, therefore, we proceed to decide the appeal after hearing ld. DR. 3.From the record we f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allowed the refund of the balance amount by observing that the interest at the rate of 24% upto the period of 28-2-2003 to 1-3-2003 under Notification No. 10/2001-C.E., dated 1-3-2001 which was prevailing at the time when the goods were stored in warehouses by the respondents, could not be charged as at the time of clearance of the goods, the rate was only 15%, fixed by Notification No. 18/2003, d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he entire period for which the goods remained in the warehouse, erroneous and based on wrong interpretation of the provisions of Section 61(2) of the Act. The interest was to be calculated in the manner and mode discussed above. After calculating the interest accordingly, the adjudicating authority rightly did not allow the refund of the disputed amount. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
