Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
C.C.E., Delhi-Iv vs M/S. S.D. Engineering Works on 22 January, 2014
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
WEST BLOCK NO.2, R.K. PURAM, NEW DELHI 110 066
Date of Hearing 22.01.2014
For Approval &Signature :
Honble Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial)
1.
Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
No
2.
Whether it would be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
No
3.
Whether Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the order?
Seen
4.
Whether order is to be circulated to the Department Authorities?
Yes
Appeal No. E/2824/2007 -EX[SM]
Application No.E/CROSS/120/2008
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.82/CE/Appl/DLH-IV/2007, dated 08.08.2007 passed by the C.C.E.(Appeals), Delhi-IV]
C.C.E., Delhi-IV Appellants
Vs.
M/s. S.D. Engineering Works Respondents
Appearance Shri RK Mishra, DR - for the appellants Shri N.K. Shama, Advocate - for the respondent CORAM: Honble Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Final Order No.____50243 ____, dated 22.01.2014 Per Honble Mrs. Archana Wadhwa :
A very short issued involved in the present appeal of the Revenue is , i.e., whether respondents are liable to pay interest in respect of the duty paid under supplementary invoices, issued after the clearance of the goods. Ld. Advocate appearing for the respondents fairly agrees that the issue is covered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of CCE, Pune Vs. SKF India Ltd. [2009 (239) E.L.T. 385 (S.C.)]. He also agrees that the demand of interest is within the limitation period.
2. In view of the above, I set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal filed by the Revenue.
(Archana Wadhwa) Member (Judicial) SSK -2-