Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (10) TMI 1155 - CESTAT MUMBAI

2015 (10) TMI 1155 - CESTAT MUMBAI - TMI - Demand of interest on differential duty - Whether the appellant is required to pay interest in a case where duty alongwith part interest was paid voluntarily - Held that:- Issue is confined to demand of interest under Section 11AB. As it is admitted fact that there is substantial delay in payment of duty even though appellant has paid interest voluntarily. I am of the view that even though the duty was not determined under subsection (2) of Section 11A .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ind any infirmity in the impugned order therefore the same is sustained - Decided against assessee. - Appeal No. E/1746/11-MUM - Dated:- 8-5-2015 - Ramesh Nair, Member (J), J. For the Appellant : Shri S P Tavkar, Consultant For the Respondents : Shri N N Prabhudesai, Superintendent (AR) & Shri Ashutosh Nath, Asstt Commissioner (AR) ORDER Per : Ramesh Nair This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. PKS/84/BEL/2011-12 dtd. 4/8/2011 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

submits that this appeal for limited relief from demand of interest of ₹ 1,06,516/-. He submits that interest on the delayed payment of duty cannot be demanded unless duty is determined under sub-section (2) of Section 11A. It is his submission that in the present case duty was not determined under subsection (2) of Section 11A therefore interest under Section 11AB cannot be demanded. It is his submission that differential duty was paid by the appellant voluntarily on there own therefore i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

177 (SC)] (b) EMCO Ltd. vs. Commissioner of C. Ex, Mumbai [2011 (272) ELT 136 (Tri-Mumbai)] 4. On the other hand, Shri Ashutosh Nath, Asstt. Commissioner (A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. He submits that the interest is chargeable on delayed payment of duty and delay may be under any circumstances. In his support he relied upon the judgment in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise vs. International Auto Ltd. [2010 (250) ELT 3 (SC)] . He .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version