9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 822X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Nigam, Addl. Commissioner (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER This is an application seeking waiver of pre-deposit of interest of Rs. 45,09,141/-. 2. At the outset, the learned AR for the Revenue has raised a preliminary objection and submitted that the present appeal is not maintainable under Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. He has submitted that the adjudicating authority has qua ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hear the appeal. In support, he has referred to the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Madura Coats Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Madurai - 2012 (284) E.L.T. 235 (Tri.-Chennai). 4. Heard both sides and perused the records. We find that the applicant had preferred a revision application before the Government of India challenging the demand of duty confirmed on the loss of goods in transit and also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned advocate for the appellant had submitted that in the present appeal, they are challenging both the quantification as well as leviability of interest. We do not find merit in the said submission of the appellant for the reason that the revisionary authority has discussed in detail the liability to duty as well as interest, on the goods lost in transit, in the revision order and the same, in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Coat's case (supra) is not applicable to the facts of the present case, as in the said case the refund/rebate settled was delayed and for the delay in getting the refund, the appellant has approached the department claiming interest under Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In that context, the Tribunal has held that asking of interest for the period of delay in getting the refund and/or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
