TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (11) TMI 362
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....: Mr. N. Anand, Advocate JUDGEMENT Per: B.S.V. MURTHY Appeal No. 291/2008 is filed by Revenue and the period covered is 2006-07. Appeal No. 782/2008 is filed by the assessee and the period covered is 2005-06. In both the appeals issue involved is common and therefore both the appeals are taken together and a common order is being passed. 2. Appellant opted for provisional assessment in respec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nalized on 22.12.2006. The excess payment amounted to Rs. 47,51,060/- in respect of which no refund was claimed by the appellant. As regards the year 2006-07, the excess payment was Rs. 1,10,84,180/- and short payment of duty was Rs. 35,29,558/-. 3. The learned counsel submits that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of the same appellant in their order reported in [2012 (276) E.L.T. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t if differential duty is paid prior to final assessment, no interest is liable to be paid. He submitted that this decision was upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay as reported in [2010 (259) E.L.T. 662 (Bom.)]. He also submits that the matter was carried to the Supreme Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed the following order on the appeal. Delay condoned. The special leave petition ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hort payment to calculate the differential duty payable. 5. Coming to the date from which interest is to be calculated, I consider that the submission of the learned counsel that Bombay High Court decision has to be followed is not correct. This is because Hon'ble Supreme Court where the matter was challenged, while rejecting the SLP, kept the issue of law open. This means that clearly Hon'ble Su....