2012 (5) TMI 475

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... A.R. for Revenue   Per Shri Rakesh Kumar (Oral):   The appellant company are engaged in building of bus bodies. They received chassis from Tata Motors Ltd. and cleared complete buses after building complete body on the chassis. During the period of dispute i.e. 1.4.07 to 31.12.2007, they paid duty on the buses on the of cost of chassis plus the body building chargers. The Departme....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....led before Commissioner (Appeals) the appellants vide stay order No.2-3(DK)/CE/JPR-I/2009 dated 8.6.2009 were directed to deposit the duty amount for compliance with the provisions of Section 35F of the Act. But on failure of the appellants to deposit the duty amount within the stipulated period, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order in appeal No. 164-165(DK)CE/JPR-I/2009 dated 27.7.2009 dismissed....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....allment and, therefore, the impugned order be set aside and the appeals be allowed to be heard on merits. Shri Alok Kothari, fairly concedes that on merits, this matter is covered against the appellants by the judgement of the Tribunal in the case of Audi Automobiles vs.C.C.E., Indore reported in 2010 (249) ELT 124 (Tri-Del.), as far as the duty demand of differential excise duty is concerned. He,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....orrectly, penalty has been correctly imposed on them under Section 11AC and Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, that though the differential duty demand has been paid, but the interest on the differential duty demand has not been paid. Shri Kothari, Advocate, the learned Counsel for Appellants however, submits that the Appellants, undertake to to pay the interest on the differential duty demand c....