https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207131 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad, ruled that interest is not payable on the differential duty accrued and paid through supplementary invoices due to a price variation clause in the contract. The Tribunal found that the demand for interest was beyond the one-year limitation period under the Central Excise Act and that the extended period was not properly invoked in the show cause notice. Despite acknowledging the merit of the interest demand, the Tribunal rejected it based on the limitation grounds, leading to the Revenue's appeal being dismissed. en-us Tue, 11 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Feb 2018 11:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207131 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad, ruled that interest is not payable on the differential duty accrued and paid through supplementary invoices due to a price variation clause in the contract. The Tribunal found that the demand for interest was beyond the one-year limitation period under the Central Excise Act and that the extended period was not properly invoked in the show cause notice. Despite acknowledging the merit of the interest demand, the Tribunal rejected it based on the limitation grounds, leading to the Revenue's appeal being dismissed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 11 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207131