TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (4) TMI 1274
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... prescribed under the provisions of Section 11AB of the Act can be recovered when the differential duty is paid on price variation?" 2. We may note that previously this Tax Appeal was dismissed by judgment dated 22nd July, 2008 [2009 (235) E.L.T. 17 (Guj.)]. However, Revenue carried the issue in appeal before the Apex Court. Such appeal was disposed of with the following order [2010 (253) E.L.T. A49 (S.C.)] : "In view of our judgment in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune v. SKF India Limited, reported in 2009 (239) E.L.T. 385 (S.C.), the matter is remitted to the High Court for de novo consideration in accordance with law. Civil Appeal stands disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs". 3. Thereafter, on 15th ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on in the case of SKF India Limited (supra) was referred to and followed was brought to our notice. 6. On the other hand, counsel for the respondent-assessee submitted that the case is different on facts. The respondent-assessee entered into an agreement, by virtue of which, the price for the goods was to be bifurcated into two parts. A part of the price was pre-determined and fixed, but the other part was fluctuating and dependent on the factors beyond the control of the assessee. She further pointed out that since the additional price was received towards the fluctuating price component, excise duty was promptly paid by the assessee. She, therefore, submitted that this is not a case where any interest should be charged under Section....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... read as follows :- "12. The Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, in its decision in the Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad v. M/s. Rucha Engineering Pvt. Limited [First Appeal No. 42 of 2007] that was relied upon by the Tribunal for dismissing the Revenue's appeal took the view that there would be no application of Section 11A(2B) or Section 11AB where differential duty was paid by the assessee as soon as it came to learn about the upward revision of prices of goods sold earlier. In M/s. Rucha Engineering, the High Court observed as follows : "It is evident that the Section 11AB comes into play if the duty paid/levied is short. Both, the Commissioner (Appeals) and the CESTAT have observed that the assessee paid the duty on i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted, the decision in the case of SKF India Limited (supra) was followed in subsequent decision in the case of CCE v. International Auto Limited (supra). The Apex Court observing that the differential price signified that value, which is the function of the price, on the date of removal/clearance of the goods was not correct. It was further observed that when the differential duty is paid after the date of clearance, it indicates short payment/short levy on the date of removal, hence interest which is for loss of revenue, becomes leviable under Section 11AB of the Act. Here again, the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Rucha Engineering Pvt. Limited (supra) was not approved. 9. Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....become payable or ought to have been paid before the date on which the Finance Bill, 2001 receives the assent of the President. Explanation 1. - Where the duty determined to be payable is reduced by the Commissioner (Appeals), the Appellate Tribunal "National Tax Tribunal" or, as the case may be, the Court, the interest shall be payable on such reduced amount of duty. Explanation 2. - Where the duty determined to be payable is increased or further increased by the Commissioner (Appeals), the Appellate Tribunal "National Tax Tribunal" or, as the case may be, the Court, the interest shall be payable on such increased or further increased amount of duty." 10. To our mind, facts on material aspects are similar in the present case. It is....