TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Upholds Commissioner's Decision, No Show Cause Notice Required under Section 11A(2B)</h1> <h3>ASSITT. COMMR. OF CE., VISAKHAPATNAM-I Versus NAGARJUNA AGRICHEM LTD.</h3> The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision, emphasizing that no Show Cause Notice was required under Section 11A(2B) as the duty had ... - Issues involved: Alleged short payment of duty, interest under Section 11A(2B), penalty imposition, appeal against Order-in-Appeal.Summary:The appeal was against Order-in-Appeal No. 137/2007 (V-I) C.E. dated 27-11-2007, where the respondent was alleged to have short paid duty by Rs. 35,927 due to a difference in cost data finalization and actual payment to their sister concern. The Adjudicating Authority confirmed the duty, demanded interest under Section 11AB, and imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,000. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the duty demand but set aside the interest and penalty. The Revenue appealed this decision.The Departmental Representative argued that interest under Section 11AB should be paid along with duty as per Explanation 2 to Section 11A(2B). They highlighted the party's non-response to the department's letter regarding interest payment, advocating for penalty imposition under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. Reference was made to a judgment by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.The respondent's Counsel supported the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision and mentioned filing a cross-objection. Upon review, it was found that the respondent voluntarily discharged the duty after finalizing cost audit records. The Commissioner (Appeals) noted that a duty demand notice was unnecessary in this case, as the duty was paid before any notice was served. The Tribunal agreed with this assessment, citing relevant case law, and rejected the Revenue's appeal.In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision, emphasizing that no Show Cause Notice was required under Section 11A(2B) as the duty had already been paid by the respondent. The appeal by the Revenue was dismissed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
