9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 191X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner (AR) JUDGEMENT Per: P R Chandrasekharan; This appeal filed by the Revenue is against Order-in-Appeal NO. AT/M-III/51/2004 dated 30.08.2004 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai IV. The short issue for consideration in this case is what is the rate of interest that would apply, where there is default in payment of duty. 2. The assessee M/s Jay Tanks & Vessels Ltd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the outstanding amount. The Rule also provided that the total amount of interest payable shall not exceed the amount of duty, which has not been paid by the due date. The department issued the notice to the appellant demanding interest as per the amended provisions for the period from 1.4.2003 onwards till 2.9.2003, whereas the appellant contended that the rate of interest applicable would be th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he lower appellate authority is not sustainable in law and be set aside. 4. None appeared for the respondent despite notice. 5. We have considered the grounds urged in the appeal memorandum and the submissions made by the Addl. Commissioner (AR). 5.1 The short question is what should be the rate of interest apply when the duty i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ken by the lower appellate authority is clearly unsustainable in law. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal filed by the Revenue by holding that the interest leviable for the period from 1.4.2003 to 2.9.2003 would be at the rate prescribed in the amended provisions of sub-rule (3) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002.
(Dictated and pronounced in Court) X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
