TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (10) TMI 1300
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....engaged in the manufacture of auto parts falling under Chapter No. 8708.00 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and sell them to M/s Maruti Udyog Ltd. (MUL) & others. Due to revision of prices the appellant raised the supplementary invoices and paid the excise duty of differential amount. Two show cause notices dated 26.10.2004 demanding interest of Rs. 38,07,947/- covering the period 1999 to 2004 and another show cause notice dated 09.02.2007 demanding interest amounting to Rs. 81,131/- for the period March, 2005 to November, 2006 were issued and after following the due process, the adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of Rs. 38,89,078/- as interest on delayed payment under Section 11AB read with Section 11A ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....5.2019 reported in 2019 (366) E.L.T. 769 (S.C.). 6. He further submits that during the disputed period, the issue of liability of interest on payment of Central Excise duty paid on supplementary invoices was not free from doubt and was finally settled by the Larger Bench of the Apex Court on 08.05.2019, hence, the allegation of the department, regarding willful suppression of facts for invoking the extended period of limitation does not survive in the present case. It is not the case of the department that the Central Excise duty liability itself was not discharged on the supplementary invoices issued by the appellant. 7. Ld. Counsel further submits that the extended period has wrongly been invoked in the present case and the liability of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, we find that the only issue is involved in the present appeal is demand of interest on supplementary invoices by invoking the extended period of limitation. We also find that the appellant deposited the duty on supplementary invoices as and when the supplementary invoices were issued. We also find that the appellant has deposited the interest under protest and has submitted that in the present case invoking the extended period of limitation to demand the interest alleging suppression is not sustainable because during the relevant period there were divergent views on the issue of liability of interest on payment of central excise duty while issuing supplementary in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(SC)] and holding that as the period of limitation that applies to recovery of the principal amount shall also apply to the claim for interest thereon, the demand is time barred. The opinion recorded by the Delhi High Court in Kwality Ice Cream Company and Another v. Union of India and others (supra) was followed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Commissioner, Central Excise Commissionerate v. VKN Industries Private Limited (CEA No. 67/2011 (O&M), decided on 17-4-2012), by holding as follows:- "6. There is no dispute that assessee has paid the differential duty on supplementary invoices regularly and has shown the same in the ER-I returns, which were filed regularly before the department, therefore, issuance of show cause notice fo....