Interest on delayed excise duty payment requires express statutory authority; procedural incorporation alone does not create liability.

Additional duty of excise on tea and tea waste was held not to carry an implied liability to interest on delayed payment where Section 157 of the Finance Act, 2003 incorporated Central Excise machinery only for refunds, exemptions and penalty. The applicable principle was that fiscal liability, including interest and penal consequences, must rest on clear legislative authority and cannot be created by implication from procedural incorporation alone. A precedent on similar statutory wording was treated as directly applicable, and the Revenue's attempt to recover interest on delayed payment therefore failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether interest was recoverable on delayed payment of additional duty of excise on tea and tea waste under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, in the absence of an express provision in Section 157 of the Finance Act, 2003.

Analysis: Section 157 of the Finance Act, 2003 levied additional duty of excise on tea and tea waste and made the provisions of the Central Excise Act and the rules made thereunder applicable only so far as they related to refunds, exemptions and imposition of penalty. The incorporation did not expressly provide for recovery of interest on delayed payment. The reasoning was supported by the principle that fiscal liability, including penal or interest consequences, must rest on clear legislative authority, and that procedural adoption of another statute's machinery does not by itself create a separate substantive liability. The cited precedent on similar statutory wording was treated as directly applicable.

Conclusion: Interest was not recoverable from the assessee on delayed payment of additional duty of excise under the provisions invoked, and the Revenue's appeals failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a levy provision incorporates the procedural framework of another fiscal enactment without expressly creating liability for interest, interest cannot be imposed by implication and must rest on clear statutory authority.

---