Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Bi Metal Bearings Ltd vs Cce, Chennai on 28 October, 2009
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH AT CHENNAI
Appeal Nos. E/83 & 777/2007 and E/2/2008
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 89/2006 (M-II) dated 24.11.2006, No. 156/2007 (M-II) dated 29.8.2007 and No. 183/2007 (M-II) dated 29.11.2007 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Chennai)
M/s. Bi Metal Bearings Ltd. Appellants
Vs.
CCE, Chennai Respondent
Appearance S/Sh V.Balasubramanian and T.R.Ramesh, Counsel for the Appellants Shri C. Dhanasekaran, SDR for the Respondent CORAM Honble Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy, Technical Member Honble Shri P.K. Das, Judicial Member Date of Hearing: 28.10.2009 Date of Decision: 28.10.2009 Final Order Nos. ____________ Per Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy Heard both sides. Both sides confirm that in these three appeals, the only issue that is required to be considered is whether for the impugned clearances, the appellants are required to pay interest in respect of duty paid after a delay after finalization of the provisional assessment. We find that this issue was referred to a larger Bench and we have now the benefit of the larger Bench decision vide Misc. Order No. 405/2008 dated 30.9.2008 holding that interest is payable in such cases on delayed payment of duty after finalization of the provisional assessment.
2. At this stage, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant raises another issue that since the impugned clearances were made by the appellants to their own factories, interest should not be charged on the plea of revenue neutrality. He, however, fairly states that this issue was not raised by the appellants before the lower authority or in the grounds of appeal filed before the Tribunal. The learned SDR appearing for the Department, however, states that in para 12 of the larger Bench decision dated 30.9.2008 there is a reference of plea of revenue neutrality and the decision of Bayer ABS Limited Vs. CCE, Vadodara 2008 (226) ELT 386. He further states while resolving the issue referred to the larger Bench, the said Bench has consciously and after taking into consideration of all aspects of the case including the revenue neutrality has opined that interest is charged in the instant case. The learned SDR also cites the decision of the Honble Supreme Court in the case of CCE, Pune Vs. S.K.F. India Ltd. 2009 (239) ELT 385 (SC), the issue of which clearly indicates that wherever duty is not paid and held back for whatever reason, the interest is payable.
3. After considering the submissions from both sides and after taking into account the answer to the specific reference made in this case to the larger Bench and also keeping in view the ratio of the cited decision of the Honble Supreme Court in the case of SKF India Ltd. (supra), we hold that the appellants are liable to pay the interest in respect of the differential duty paid after a delay after finalization of the provisional assessment even in respect of clearances made to their own unit.
4. All the above appeals are accordingly dismissed.
(Dictated and pronounced in open court)
(P. K. Das) (Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy)
Judicial Member Technical Member
Rex
??
??
??
??
3