2017 (11) TMI 707

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....IJA, Supdt. (Ar) for respondent ORDER Per: Ramesh Nair 1. The fact of the case is that the appellant manufactured various components for needle roller bearings and used the same captively for the manufacture of needle bearings in their own Thane plant and other plants situated at Walug, Aurangabad, Hyderabad, etc. While calculating the assessable value certain overheads such as administra....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... fraud, etc. on the part of the assesee. 3. In the present case admittedly there is no case of suppression of fact on the part of the appellant, therefore, interest prior to 11/05/2001 is not chargeable, for the same reason the appellant was not liable for penalty, hence, the penalty of Rs. 30,000/- may be set aside. He placed reliance on the judgement in their own case of this Tribunal passed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... As regards the demand of interest, we are convinced that the interest before 11/05/2001 was chargeable only when the non-payment of duty is due to the reason of suppression of fact mis-declaration, fraud, collision, etc. In the present case admittedly there is no such charge on the appellant, therefore the interest for the period prior to 11/05/2001 is not chargeable. This issue has been consider....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....alley Fertilizers Co. v. Collector of Central Excise, Vadodara - 2001 (128) E.L.T. 13. After that decision of the Apex Court, the appellants deposited the differential duty. There is nothing on the record to suggest if there had been any suppression of facts by the appellants from the Department while availing the benefit of the above said Notification before the decision of the Apex Court. Even i....