TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 927X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red? Held that: - the issue of valuation, resulting in additional demand is interpretational as the appellant had voluntarily paid the differential amount and further the demand of interest and penalty have been clearly raised much after the relevant period, taking into consideration the scheme of the Central Excise law, and the limitation period prescribed for various purposes under different ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -2009 dated 19-1-2009 and imposed an amount of ₹ 52,192/- as interest and penalty of ₹ 1,24,848/- under Sections 11AB and 11AC respectively of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant are a Ltd. Company engaged in the manufacture of goods falling under Chapter Heading Nos. 52, 54 and 55 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Central Excise Offic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellant is required to pay the interest and penalty on differential duty paid by them, when the show cause notice dated 22-4-2008 was issued to the appellant for the same issue, beyond a period of 5 years, where the duty demand itself is time-barred. 4. Being aggrieved by the impugned orders, the appellant has filed the present appeal before this Tribunal. 5. The learned counsel for appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , in the case of Nizam Sugar Factory v. Collector of Central Excise, A.P. - 2006 (197) E.L.T. 465 (S.C.), it was held that : as the demand is well beyond the five years period envisaged under Section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944, thus, the proposal to recover interest and impose penalty is unsustainable and prays to set aside the order . 6. The learned AR appearing for the Revenue, relies o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
