https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121740 Interest on delayed duty payment for removal of inputs or capital goods as such was held not chargeable where the Commissioner (Appeals) correctly construed Notification No. 13/2003-C.E. (N.T.) and the deletion of the words relating to the date of removal did not make the order erroneous. The Tribunal also relied on its earlier view that monthly payment of duty was permissible for such removals from the factory. On that basis, the revenue's challenge to denial of interest failed and the assessee's position was upheld. en-us Fri, 18 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Aug 2012 18:41:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121740 Interest on delayed duty payment for removal of inputs or capital goods as such was held not chargeable where the Commissioner (Appeals) correctly construed Notification No. 13/2003-C.E. (N.T.) and the deletion of the words relating to the date of removal did not make the order erroneous. The Tribunal also relied on its earlier view that monthly payment of duty was permissible for such removals from the factory. On that basis, the revenue's challenge to denial of interest failed and the assessee's position was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 18 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121740