TMI Blog2007 (6) TMI 327X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authorized the filing of appeals. It is now being pointed out that the Committee has since authorized the filing of the appeals. 3. This is a case where the Original Authority as well as first Appellate Authority had found in favour of the assessee. The issue in dispute was liability of the assessee to pay interest. The impugned order of the Commissioner had considered the claim of the revenue for interest in great detail. The order reached a finding that claim for interest under Rule 8(3) or under Section 11AB is not sustainable. The reasons for the same are to be found in the order itself. Relevant portion of the order may be noted :- 7. I have gone through the grounds of appeal and all other evidence on record. The respondent has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g whether the price of goods would increase and if so, to what extent and at what time. Hence, the respondent cannot be faulted for not paying the correct amount of duty at the time of clearance of goods. In the case of Indian Seamless Steel Alloys Ltd. v. UOI - 2003 (156) E.L.T. 945 (Bom), the Hon ble High Court of Bombay has held that if the unforeseen circumstances beyond the control of the assessee result in non-payment of duty, such circumstances cannot be construed to mean that the appellant had failed to pay the excise duty on the due date. The relevant Para 17 of the judgment is as follows :- It is also a well settled principle of law that the law does not compel a man to do that which he cannot possibly do and the said princip ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r a penalty for late payment or non-payment of duty, the same as under consideration in this appeal. Similarly, the provision of Section 11AB also will not apply. That section applies where the liability arose as a result of any acts or omissions of the manufacturer such as suppression, etc. specified in that rule . (Emphasis added) In the instant case, there was no short payment of duty resulting from any act or omission on the part of respondent, such as, suppression of facts or fraud etc. 4. The above findings of the Commissioner are a complete answer to the points raised in the appeal. There is no error or illegality in them. A finding to the contrary would have been. 5. The present appeal refers to Rule 7 in support of the cla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
