TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 284X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - Dated:- 10-6-2016 - Shri P.K. Choudhary, Judicial Member Shri M. Kannan, Adv For the Appellant Shri R. Subramaniyan, AC (AR) For the Respondent ORDER M/s. Sundram Fasteners Ltd., the appellant herein are the manufacturers of Bolts, Nuts and Screws falling under sub-heading No. 73181500 and 73181600 of the CETA, 1985 and cleared the final products on payment of duty and av ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2 and 22.11.12. As per Boards letter F. No. 06/20/2005 -CX-1 dated 14.03.2006, it is mandatory that interest is payable on the duty paid on the receipt realized through supplementary invoices. Hence, a SCN dated 29.05.2014 was issued to the appellants proposing demand of recovery of interest of ₹ 2,49,108/- and appropriation of the same towards the demand. Proposing invocation of provisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal. 3. Ld. Counsel Shri M. Kannan, Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the appellants have suo motu paid differential duty for the amount realized through supplementary invoices and this has been brought to the notice of the department vide ER-1 returns filed. The ld. Counsel argued that the duty was paid soon after raising the supplementary invoices and intimated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts that the adjudicating authority has rightly invoked Section 11A (4)/ (5) for alleged suppression of facts. As per Section 11 A, where excise duty is short levied or short paid, it is mandatory that interest is payable and for such non-payment or delayed payment of interest, the appellant assessee is liable for penalty under Rule 25 of CER, 2002. He further submits that had it not been pointe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ain contention is that the appeal ought to have been heard on merits since the non-payment of interest is not intentional but only due to inadvertence and the authority should have had taken a lenient view. The appellant have deposited 17.5% (on 24.05.2016) of the penalty amount which accounts for 7.5% of penalty to be paid for filing appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) and 10% of penalty to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
