https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344298 The Appellate Tribunal confirmed the duty demand against M/s Gandhilon Texturisers for collecting extra charges from customers but allowed the benefit of cum duty price for computing duty liability. The Tribunal directed the Adjudicating Authority to re-calculate duty liability based on the Supreme Court's interpretation of excisable value. Regarding interest on delayed payment of duty, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, citing precedents that interest was not chargeable for periods before the Finance Act 2001 amendment. The matter was remanded for re-quantification of duty liability, partially allowing the appeal. en-us Fri, 19 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Jun 2017 08:14:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344298 The Appellate Tribunal confirmed the duty demand against M/s Gandhilon Texturisers for collecting extra charges from customers but allowed the benefit of cum duty price for computing duty liability. The Tribunal directed the Adjudicating Authority to re-calculate duty liability based on the Supreme Court's interpretation of excisable value. Regarding interest on delayed payment of duty, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, citing precedents that interest was not chargeable for periods before the Finance Act 2001 amendment. The matter was remanded for re-quantification of duty liability, partially allowing the appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 19 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344298