TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 998X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ashok K. Arya, (Technical Member) Ms. Priyanka Goel, Advocate for the appellant Shri. G.R. Singh, AR for the respondent ORDER Per: Ashok K. Arya 1. M/s Kotsons Pvt. Ltd. is in appeal against Order in Original No.31-33/2008 dated 16/09/2008 whereunder liability of interest amounting to ₹ 23, 72,364/- has been confirmed against the appellant. 2. The brief facts are that:- (i) Appellant is engaged in manufacturing electrical transformers falling under heading 850400 of Central Excise Tariff and availing Cenvat credit. Appellant is selling goods at their factory gate to unrelated buyers at the price determined in terms of section 4 of Central Excise Act, 1944. They paid the appropriate duty on transaction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt in the case of Steel Authority of India Limited V/s Commissioner of C.EX., Raipur - 2015 (326) ELT 450 (SC) has expressed difference of opinion with the Apex Court s decision in SKF India Limited (supra) and international Auto Limited (supra) . Hon ble Supreme Court therein has observed as under:- 23. The two judgments in SKF India Ltd. and International Auto are by the same Bench. International Auto follows SKF India Ltd. The primary factor by which the Bench was influenced was that there is a loss of revenue to the Government and, therefore, the Government should compensate for that. It proceeds on the basis that the price which was originally stated at the time of removal of the goods was understated‟ (para 8 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he direction of the Government. This claim of the assessee was rejected and the order upheld by this Court as well with the following discussion : 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the assessee. Once the assessee has cleared the goods on the classification and price indicated by him at the time of the removal of the goods from the factory gate, the assessee becomes liable to payment of duty on that date and time and subsequent reduction in Excise Department insofar as the liability to payment of excise duty was concerned. This is the view which was taken by the Tribunal in the case of Indo Hacks Ltd. v. CCE - 1986 (25) E.L.T. 69 (Trib.) and it seems to us that the Tribunal‟s view that the duty is chargeable at the rat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ew the earlier judgment as it was necessary to maintain consistency and depict certainty in law. At the same time, Court made the following remarks : ...That is not to say that if on a subsequent occasion, the Court is satisfied that its earlier decision was clearly erroneous, it should not hesitate to correct the error; but before a previous decision is pronounced to be plainly erroneous, the Court must be satisfied with a fair amount of unanimity amongst its members that a revision of the said view is fully justified. It is not possible or desirable, and in any case it would be inexpedient to lay down any principles which should govern the approach of the Court in dealing with the question of reviewing and revising its earlier decis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se which is of seminal importance having far reaching ramifications. 7.2 From the above discussion, it appears that there are two views on the issue and the matter is now pending with the Larger Bench of the Hon ble Supreme Court. When it is so it is deemed fit to set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the Original Adjudicating Authority to decide the same afresh, as and when the decision of the Larger Bench of the Hon ble Supreme Court is made available on the subject and after giving the opportunity of personal hearing to both sides. 7.3 However, since the matter is pending with the Larger Bench of the Hon ble Supreme Court the status quo has to be maintained in respect of recovery and refund, if any, from/to the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
