Court rules in favor of Revenue due to non-appearance of respondent, citing precedent from Supreme Court case.

The court decided ex-parte as the respondent did not appear. The issue of interest on duty paid supplementary invoices due to price escalation was settled in favor of the Revenue, following a precedent set by the Supreme Court in a previous case involving SKF India Ltd. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the original order was restored, allowing the Revenue's appeal. The cross objection was also disposed of during the judgment.

---

---

Issues involved: Whether interest is chargeable on duty paid supplementary invoices due to price escalation.

Analysis:
- The respondent did not appear despite prior notice, leading to the matter being decided ex-parte in accordance with Rule 21 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982.
- The learned SDR argued that the issue had been settled in favor of the Revenue by the Supreme Court in a previous case.
- The main issue was whether interest under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is payable on differential duty paid on goods cleared due to price escalation.
- The judge, after considering the submissions, found that the issue had been settled in favor of the Revenue by the Supreme Court in a previous case involving SKF India Ltd.
- Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the order in original was restored, allowing the Revenue's appeal.
- The cross objection was also disposed of during the judgment.

---