Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai
Mseb Pole Factory vs Commissioner Of C. Ex. on 9 May, 2005
Equivalent citations: 2005(187)ELT209(TRI-MUMBAI)
ORDER Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)
1. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of P.C.C. Poles. During the period relevant for the purpose of present appeal, their assessment was provisional. The same was finalised by proper officer vide his impugned order in Original dated 31-1-2003. Differential duty of Rs. 2,41,830/- was paid by them in two instalments dated 22-11-2002 and 4-2-2003 i.e. within a period of one month from the date of passing of the order by Assistant Commissioner. Inspite of that, authorities below have confirmed interest against them and as also imposed personal penalty of Rs. 5,000/-.
2. Relevant provision of Rule 7(4) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 reads as under :
"The assessee shall be liable to pay interest on any amount payable to Central Government, consequent to order for final assessment under Sub-rule (3) at the rate specified by the Central Government by notification issued under Section 11AA or Section 11AB of the Act from the first date of the month succeeding the month for which amount is determined, till the date of payment thereof."
It is clear from the above rule that interest provision would be applicable after the expiry of the period of one month from the date when the amount is determined. In the present case, the amount of duty was determined against the appellant on 31-1-2003 and entire differential duty stands paid by 24-2-2003. In these circumstances, there is no question of confirmation of interest against the appellants or imposition of penalty upon them. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed with consequential relief to the appellant.
3. It may be made clear that the impugned order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) pertains to two different appeals. Ld. representative of the appellant have submitted that another appeal, on identical point against, the same impugned order was subsequently filed by them with condonation of delay application, which is still pending. As such, it is made clear that the present order pertains to the appeal in respect of the facts narrated above.
(Dictated in Court)