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

2016 (12) TMI 986 - CESTAT CHENNAI

2016 (12) TMI 986 - CESTAT CHENNAI - TMI - Quantification of interest liability - whether CVD portion to be deducted from duty amount while calculation of interest? - Held that: - It is seen that in para-14 of the order, Settlement Commission had directed that the department, while calculating the interest amount, shall deduct the CVD portion from the duty amount. Finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) in para-12 of his order that appellant's representation to adjust the interest demand with thei .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

inal authority for de novo consideration of the matter - appeal allowed by way of remand. - Appeal No. E/40830/2015 - Final Order No. 42242/2016 - Dated:- 4-11-2016 - Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member ( Technical ) Shri S.R. Sankareshwaram, Advocate For the Appellant Shri S. Govindarajan, AC (AR) For the Respondent ORDER Appellant is engaged in the sale of refurbished photocopier machines. Pursuant to investigation by the DGCEI, show cause notice dt. 3.5.2006 was issued inter alia proposing dema .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the appeal, it has been submitted that Settlement Commission has also ordered that while calculating the interest amount, department shall deduct the CVD portion from the duty amount. Appellant had made a representation dt. 21.4.2010 to the department wherein they stated that as per their calculations, interest of ₹ 10,04,387 was payable and CVD credit available to them was ₹ 22,98,152/-. It appears that vide another representation, appellants have claimed an amount of ₹ 20,58, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

10,04,387/- was payable and CVD portion credit available to them was ₹ 22,98,152/-. Therefore according to them a net amount of ₹ 12,93,765/- was payable to them by the Department as refund. Further they had enclosed the Chartered Accountant calculations and claimed ₹ 20,58,309/- as refund. Here it is difficult to understand that if ₹ 12.93 lakhs net amount was payable to them, as per their own admission, then why an enhanced amount of ₹ 20.8 lakhs was claimed and t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d also to prove that the incidence of such duty has not been passed on by them to their Customers/buyers. The unjust enrichment onus had lied upon them under Section 11B of CEA, 1944." 2. Today, during the hearing, Shri S.R. Sankareshwaram, Learned Advocate, appearing on behalf of appellant, pointed out that in the previous hearings, department had been directed to supply copies of seized documents. However, they are yet to receive the same. He submits a letter of jurisdictional Commissione .....

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