Alstom T and D India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Ltu, Chennai - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1150274
CourtCustoms Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided OnJan-13-2014
Case NumberAppeal No. E/S/40339 of 2013 & E/40406 of 2013 [Arising Out of Order-in-Appeal No.74 of 2012 dt. 29.11.2012 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, LTU (Appeals), Chennai]
JudgeTHE HONOURABLE MR. P.K. DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER & THE HONOURABLE MR. MATHEW JOHN, TECHNICAL MEMBER
AppellantAlstom T and D India Ltd.
RespondentCommissioner of Central Excise, Ltu, Chennai
Excerpt:
p.k. das, j. 1. after hearing both sides, we find that appeal may be taken up at this stage of hearing of stay petition. accordingly, after disposing of the stay application, the appeal is taken up for hearing. 2. heard both sides and perused the records. 3. the learned advocate submits that they have paid duty on the differential amount for subsequent revision of price after clearance of the goods.  it is contended that appeal relates to demand of interest and penalty.  ld. advocate further submits that the present appellant was formerly known as areva t and d india ltd.  it is submitted that the tribunal for the earlier period dismissed the appeal on the same issue which was challenged before the hon'ble madras high court. it is submitted that by order dt. 10.4.2012, the hon'ble madras high court in mp.no. 1 to 1 of 2012 in cma no.475 to 478 of 2012 granted absolute stay. 4. we find that the hon'ble supreme court in the case of cce vs skf india ltd. 2009 (239) elt 385 (sc) held that interest is payable for subsequent revision of price after clearance of the goods. the hon'ble supreme court set aside the penalty.  it is noted that the said decision was followed by the supreme court in cce vs international auto ltd. 2010 (250) elt 3 (sc). in view of settled legal position, we set aside penalty and uphold demand of interest. the appeal is partly allowed. the stay application is disposed of.
Judgment:

P.K. Das, J.

1. After hearing both sides, we find that appeal may be taken up at this stage of hearing of stay petition. Accordingly, after disposing of the stay application, the appeal is taken up for hearing.

2. Heard both sides and perused the records.

3. The Learned advocate submits that they have paid duty on the differential amount for subsequent revision of price after clearance of the goods.  It is contended that appeal relates to demand of interest and penalty.  Ld. advocate further submits that the present appellant was formerly known as Areva T and D India Ltd.  It is submitted that the Tribunal for the earlier period dismissed the appeal on the same issue which was challenged before the Hon'ble Madras High Court. It is submitted that by order dt. 10.4.2012, the Hon'ble Madras High Court in MP.No. 1 to 1 of 2012 in CMA No.475 to 478 of 2012 granted absolute stay.

4. We find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE Vs SKF India Ltd. 2009 (239) ELT 385 (SC) held that interest is payable for subsequent revision of price after clearance of the goods. The Hon'ble Supreme Court set aside the penalty.  It is noted that the said decision was followed by the Supreme Court in CCE Vs International Auto Ltd. 2010 (250) ELT 3 (SC). In view of settled legal position, we set aside penalty and uphold demand of interest. The appeal is partly allowed. The stay application is disposed of.