2008 (3) TMI 256

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Padmawati Patil, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order]. - These two appeals filed by the Revenue against Order-in-Appeal No. PI/35/07, dated 29-3-2007. 2. The issue involved in this case is regarding the demand of interest, from the respondent on the ground that the respondent had raised supplementary invoices on account of price revision and paid differential excise duty subsequently. The ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ation in the Official Gazette, from the first date of the month succeeding the month in which the duty ought to have been paid under this Act, or from the date of such erroneous refund, as the case may be, but for the provisions contained in sub-section (2), or sub-section (2B), of section 11A till the date of payment of such duty. It is his submission that in the present case, the assessee has ra....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sion of Rule 7(4) would not get attracted in this case. It is her submission that respondents have already discharged differential duty liability immediately on the receipt of the amended purchase order. It is her submission that in an identical issue, for an earlier period, in the respondent's own case, the Tribunal, vide its order No. A/1629-33/07/C-IV/SMB, dated 14-11-07, has held that the resp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Commissioner are not tenable." It can be noticed from the above reproduced portion that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has come to conclusion that the differential duty has been paid immediately after the receipt of the amended purchase order. 6. On perusal of the grounds of appeal, I find that the Revenue has not adduced any evidences that duty was payable by the respondent, was not pai....