Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S Vvf Limited vs Commissioner (Appeals) on 15 February, 2017
CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, West Zonal Bench, O-20 NMH Compound, Ahmedabad Appeal No. : E/355/2011 Arising out of OIA-SKSS/293/DMN/VALSAD/2010-11 dt 08/12/2010 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax-DAMAN. M/s Vvf Limited - Appellant(s) Vs Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax-DAMAN - Respondent(s)
Represented by For Assessee : Shri J Surti, Advocate For Revenue : Shri L Patra, Authorised Representative CORAM :
Dr. D.M. Misra, Honble Member (Judicial) Date of Hearing / Decision : 15/2/2017 ORDER No. A/10415 / 2017 Per : Dr D.M. Misra, Heard both sides.
2. This is an appeal filed against OIA-SKSS/293/DMN/VALSAD/2010-11 dt 08/12/2010 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax-DAMAN.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the there was a classification dispute relating to the product Tetmosol soap; the Dept sought its classification not as a medicated soap but as a toilet Soap. Consequently, Demand Notice was issued for the period May 2003 to December 2003 for recovery of differential duty of Rs 40,09,117/-. On adjudication, the demand was confirmed alongwith interest. The Appellant unsuccessfully pursued the matter before the Ld Commissioner (Appeals) and also before this Tribunal. Thereafter, they filed SLP before the Honble Supreme Court and also paid the differential duty. However, during the pendency of the SLP before the Honble Supreme Court, the Dept. adjusted the interest on the differential duty amounting to Rs 15,02,571/- against the rebate claim sanctioned. The Ld Advocate submits that now the classification issue has been decided by the Honble Supreme Court in their favour reported as VVF Ltd vs. CCE, Surat II 2016(334)ELT.579 (SC). It is his contention that the recovery of interest therefore is unsustainable in law.
4. The Ld AR for the Revenue does not dispute.
5. Since the classification issue is settled in favour of the assessee, the matter is remanded to the Adjudicating Authority to consider the issue of recovery of interest in the light of the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court dt 25th Feb. 2016. In the result, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Adjudicating Authority to decide the issue afresh on merit. Appeal is allowed by way of remand.
(Dictated and pronounced in the Court) (D.M. Misra) Member (Judicial) swami ??
??
??
??
2