Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Cce, Delhi-Ii vs M/S Omega Bright Steels (P) Ltd on 9 November, 2009
CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, West Block No.2, R. K. Puram, New Delhi COURT-III Date of hearing/decision: 9.11.2009 Excise Appeal No. 2856 of 2007-SM [Arising out of order-in-Appeal No. 76/CE/Appl/DLH-IV/2007 dated 13.7.2007 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Delhi-I] For approval and signature: Honble Shri M. Veeraiyan, Technical Member 1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982. 2 Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? 3 Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order? 4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities? CCE, Delhi-II Appellant Vs. M/s Omega Bright Steels (P) Ltd. Respondent
Appearance:
Appeared for the Appellant Shri R.K. Saini, JDR Appeared for the Respondent- Shri C.D. Banga, Consultant Coram: Honble Shri M. Veeraiyan, Technical Member Order No.___________________________ Per: M. Veeraiyan:
This is an Appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), Delhi-I dated 13.7.2007 by which the order of the original Authority confirming demand of interest amounting to Rs.58,280.35 on the duty paid subsequently on supplementary invoices was set aside.
2. Both sides agree that the issue is decided in favour of the Department by the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune Vs. SKF India Ltd. reported in 2009 (239) ELT 385 (SC).
3. In view of the above, order of the Commissioner setting aside the demand of interest is not sustainable. Accordingly, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside and order of the original Authority confirming demand of interest is restored. The Appeal is allowed. (Dictated & pronounced in open Court) (M. VEERAIYAN) TECHNICAL MEMBER RM