2011 (12) TMI 429

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bina Cano, JDR, for the Respondent. ORDER This application filed by the Department, respondent in Appeal No. E/534/2008, points out a mistake apparent from the record and seeks appropriate amendment of Final Order No. 857/2010, dated 28-5-2010 passed by this Bench. There is no representation for the respondent in this application (appellant in the appeal) despite notice. 2. After exa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n 27-4-2007 for recovery of an amount of Rs. 1,67,813/- as interest on MODVAT credit for the period 5-1-1996 to 24-6-2004 under Rule 57-I read with Section 11AA of the Central Excise Act. This demand was also contested. The dispute ultimately came to be settled in Final Order No. 857/2010, dated 28-5-2010 ibid, wherein the demand of interest was set aside and appeal of the assessee was allowed. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... from Assistant Commissioner, Income Tax, Rajkot v. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. [2008 (230) E.L.T. 385 (S.C.) = 2010 (18) S.T.R. 84 (S.C.)]. 4. After considering the submissions, I have found substance in the present grievance of the Department. Sub-rule (3) of Rule 57-I had been brought into force on 31-5-1995 and the same was clearly invoked in the relevant show-cause notice, Or....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....le Central Excise Rules, 1944, wherein there were no provisions for demanding and confirming an amount of interest for availment of ineligible credit, I find that the subsequent show-cause notice issued by the authorities for demanding interest invoking the provisions which were not in statute during the relevant period, is incorrect and not in accordance with law as settled by the Hon'ble Supreme....