2009 (3) TMI 687

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... examining the records and hearing both sides, I come across two issues in this case : (a) whether the appellants were liable to pay interest on the amount of duty belatedly paid @ Rs. 1,000/- per day in terms of Rule 8(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 as this provision stood during the material period; (b) whether the penalty of Rs. 10,000/- imposed on them under Rule 25 of the aforesaid Rule....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... is higher" contained in Rule 8(3) (as this provision stood prior to 1-4-2005) was invalidated by the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Lucid Colloids Ltd. v. Union of India - 2006 (200) E.L.T. 377 (Raj.) and it was held that interest chargeable on delayed payment of duty had to be only at the rate notified by the Central Government under Section 11AB. I am told that the view taken by the Hon'bl....