2014 (10) TMI 927

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Agrawal, Additional Commissioner (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER The appellant M/s. Sunil Industries Ltd. is in appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. BR/366/Th-I/2012, dated 4-12-2012, whereby the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeal against Order-in-Original No. 59/2008-2009 dated 19-1-2009 and imposed an amount of Rs. 52,192/- as interest and penalty of Rs. 1,24,848/- unde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....5 when it was brought to its notice. 3. It is not under dispute that the appellant had recovered additional amount on the above-mentioned charges by raising debit notes at later date and the same were not included in the assessable value. The present issue is to decide, whether the appellant is required to pay the interest and penalty on differential duty paid by them, when the show cause ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... period of more than three years from deposit. It manifest that, the department had closed the issue. He further contends that when the demand itself is unsustainable, the question of payment of interest and imposition of penalty does not arise. Reliance have been placed on Hon'ble Apex Court judgment, in the case of Nizam Sugar Factory v. Collector of Central Excise, A.P. - 2006 (197) E.L.T. 465 ....