TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (4) TMI 578
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - All the three appeals are decided by a common order as they arise out of the same impugned order passed by the authorities below. We have heard Shri S.J. Vyas, ld. Advocate appearing for the appellants and Shri S.R. Prasad, SDR appearing of the Revenue. 2. M/s. Neptune Spin Fab Pvt. Limited is engaged in the manufacture of c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Rs. 7,32,163/- was raised on the ground that the appellants have failed to deposit the said assessed duty during the period 1-1-2003 to 31-3-2003 interest of Rs. 4,84,669/- was also sought to be recovered for the delayed payment of duty for the months of September 2002 to November 2002, under Section 11AB of the Act, along with confirmation of interest amount in respect of the duty paid from the M....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rfeiture. We find that the issue is no more res integra and stands decided by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Noble Drugs Limited v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Nasik [2007 (215) E.L.T. 500 (Tri.-LB)]. It stand held in the said decision that prior to insertion of sub Rule 3(A) in Rule 8 with effect from 31-3-2005, an assessee was entitled to discharge duty liability out of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... hence would not attract the interest provisions, does not convince us inasmuch as, the non deposit of duty by the appellants on the specified date have resulted in loss to the Revenue, which is required to be compensated by way of payment of interest. As such, we hold that the appellants are liable to pay interest on the delay of payments. 5. As regards penalties, we find that Commissioner ....