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
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Don't have an account? Register Here
<h1>Appellant entitled to interest, penalty discharge benefit; impugned order set aside; appeal allowed with consequential relief.</h1> <h3>M/s Pel Industries Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise-Vapi</h3> M/s Pel Industries Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise-Vapi - TMI Issues:Calculation of interest from default date, Benefit of 25% penalty discharge.Analysis:The appeal was filed against an order by the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding a demand notice for duty recovery. The Tribunal directed the appellant to deposit a specific amount as a condition to hear the appeal. The Tribunal later decided the appeal, reducing the demand amount. The appellant requested adjustment of penalty and interest from the pre-deposit amount. The Assistant Commissioner sanctioned a refund claim, deducting penalty and interest. The appellant contended that interest calculation by the department was incorrect and relied on legal precedents to support their argument.The appellant argued that interest should be calculated from the pre-deposit date, not the default date, and that they should benefit from the 25% penalty discharge. The Revenue maintained that the amount deposited was not a final payment towards the duty, interest, and penalty. The Tribunal considered whether interest should be paid from the default date or the pre-deposit date, and if the appellant should benefit from the penalty discharge. The Tribunal noted that the right to appeal is subject to conditions, and the appellant had complied with the Tribunal's direction regarding the deposit amount.The Tribunal held that the appellant should pay interest until the pre-deposit date and could claim the benefit of the penalty discharge. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with any consequential relief as per law. The decision was based on the appellant's compliance with the Tribunal's order and legal principles established in previous cases.