Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane I Vs. Pratibha Pipes and Structural Ltd

Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane I vs Pratibha Pipes and Structural Ltd

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Jan 13, 2010

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/942418

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/942418
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: The Honourable Mr. P.G. Chacko, Member (Judicial)
Decided On: Jan 13, 2010
Case Number: Appeal No. E/04 of 2009
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane I

Advocate Mr N.A. Sayyad, JDR, for Appellant. Ms Purnima Laxminarayanan, Advocate, for Respondent.

Respondent

Pratibha Pipes and Structural Ltd

Excerpt

1. after examining the records and hearing both sides, i note that the short question arising for consideration is, whether under section 11ab of the central excise act, the respondent is liable to pay interest on the differential amount of duty paid by them for the period september 03 to may 05. the said duty was paid under supplementary invoices issued after clearance of the goods. when the goods were cleared from factory, duty had been paid on the assessable value determined on the basis of the price originally agreed between the assessee and their buyers. the price subsequently came to be enhanced as per the relevant price escalation clause of the contract. accordingly, for recovering the differential price from the buyers and paying the differential duty on the goods, the assessee issued the above supplementary invoices. the question whether interest under section 11ab was payable on such differential amount of duty was settled by the hon’ble supreme court in the case of commissioner vs skf ltd 2009-tiol-82-sc-cx. as per the hon’ble supreme court’s ruling, such interest is payable by the assessee. the prayer in this appeal of the revenue is, therefore, liable to be granted. there is no challenge against the dropping of penalty. 2. the impugned order is set aside insofar as the decision of the lower appellate authority on the interest-related issue is concerned. this appeal is allowed, accordingly.

Full Judgment

1. After examining the records and hearing both sides, I note that the short question arising for consideration is, whether under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, the respondent is liable to pay interest on the differential amount of duty paid by them for the period September 03 to May 05. The said duty was paid under supplementary invoices issued after clearance of the goods. When the goods were cleared from factory, duty had been paid on the assessable value determined on the basis of the price originally agreed between the assessee and their buyers. The price subsequently came to be enhanced as per the relevant price escalation clause of the contract. Accordingly, for recovering the differential price from the buyers and paying the differential duty on the goods, the assessee issued the above supplementary invoices. The question whether interest under Section 11AB was payable on such differential amount of duty was settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner vs SKF Ltd 2009-TIOL-82-SC-CX. As per the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s ruling, such interest is payable by the assessee. The prayer in this appeal of the Revenue is, therefore, liable to be granted. There is no challenge against the dropping of penalty.

2. The impugned order is set aside insofar as the decision of the lower appellate authority on the interest-related issue is concerned. This appeal is allowed, accordingly.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane I vs Pratibha Pipes and... Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge The Honourable Mr. P.G. Chacko, Member (Judicial)