News Update

Delhi HC orders DGCA to deregister GO First’s aircraftIndia successfully tests SMART anti-submarine missile-assisted torpedo systemKiller heatwave kills hundreds of thousands of fish in Southern VietnamHong Kong struck by close to 1000 lightningColumbia Univ campus turns into ‘American Gaza’ - Pro-Palestinian students & counter-protesters clashViksit Bharat @2047: Taxes form the BedrockGST - April month collections go past Rs 2 lakh crore threshold - peak to Rs 2.1 lakh croreCX - Alleged clandestine removal - Not replying to SCN on the ground that letter is not furnished by department is only a ruse as reliance is not placed on the same by the respondent authority for adjudicating the SCNs: SCGST - Proper officer observes that the reply filed is not satisfactory and since the assessee has nothing more to say, demand is confirmed - Officer has not applied his mind - Matter remitted: HCGST - Petitioner had no opportunity to even object to the retrospective cancellation of registration - Petitioner does not seek to continue his business and has sought cancellation of registration - Order modified accordingly: HCGST - Seizing the outward movement of funds from petitioner's bank account - Life of an order of provisional attachment u/s 83(2) is only one year - HDFC Bank, henceforth, cannot restrain operation of bank account: HCTax - on Death and ContemplationDelhi, Noida schools receive bomb threats; Children sent back homeI-T- Writ court is not required to interfere with assessment order, where assessee also has available option of statutory appeal: HCED seizes Rs 90 Cr stored in crypto in Gaming App scamI-T-Transfer of assessment is sustained, where assessee does not reply to any notice issued in this regard & where valid reasons exist for transferring assessment: HCHM appeals Naxalism will be erased in 2 yrs if Modi voted back to powerAmerica softens offence related to use of marijuanaI-T - Rule 11UA does not mentions pre-condition of approval of balance sheet by Annual General Meeting: ITATAfter US & UK India comes third in terms of 79 mn cyber attacks in 2023: StudyCBIC revises tariff value of gold, silver & edible oils
 
Once the amended rules have come into force, they have to be given full effect and, therefore, for period from 1.4.2003, new rate of interest shall apply and not rate of interest which was prevalent when amount of duty was due - Otherwise, entire rule becomes infructuous/otiose: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, APR 04, 2014: THIS is a Revenue appeal.

The assessee defaulted in payment of excise duty amounting to Rs.2,26,240/- for the month of February, 2003 and Rs.1,81,656/- for the month of March, 2003.

The due dates for payment of duty were 15.3.2003 for February, 2003 and 15.4.2003 for the month of March, 2003. However, the payment of duty was made only on 2.9.2003; hence there was a delay of 169 days and 148 days respectively in payment of the duty for the months of February and March, 2003 respectively.

The rate of interest underwent change vide Central Excise (Second Amendment) Rules, 2003, which came into force from 1.4.2003 [Notification 12/2003-CE(NT) refers]. As per the amended rule, the rate of interest applicable was @2% per month or Rs.1,000/- per day whichever is higher for the period starting from the first day of the due date till the date of actual payment of the outstanding amount . The Rule also provided that the total amount of interest payable shall not exceed the amount of duty, which has not been paid by the due date.

The department issued notice to the appellant demanding interest as per the amended provisions for the period from 1.4.2003 onwards till 2.9.2003 , whereas the appellant contended that the rate of interest applicable would be those prevailing on the due date . The adjudicating authority confirmed the interest demand as per the amended provisions.

The Commissioner(A) set aside the order and held that the rate of interest applicable will be the one that was prevailing on the date when the duty was required to be paid.

As mentioned, Revenue is aggrieved and, therefore, has filed an appeal before the CESTAT.

It is submitted that when the rules were amended and new rates of interest were prescribed effective form 1.4.2003, it is the new interest rate that should apply on the outstanding amount of duty; otherwise the amendment made in the interest rate would be infructuous and otiose.

None appeared for the respondent assessee.

The Bench observed –

"5.1 The short question is what should be the rate of interest apply when the duty is outstanding. It is not in dispute that the interest rate was enhanced w.e.f. 1.4.2003 by amending sub-rule (3) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 and as per the amended provisions, the rate of interest applicable was 2% per month and Rs.1000/- per day, whichever is higher, subject to the cap of the amount of duty outstanding. Once the amended rules have come into force, they have to be given full effect and, therefore, for the period from 1.4.2003, the new rate of interest shall apply and not the rate of interest which was prevalent when the amount duty was due. Otherwise, the entire rule becomes infructuous/otiose. It is a settled position in law that the statute should not be interpreted so as to make the provisions infructuous or otiose.

6. In view of the above, the view taken by the lower appellate authority is clearly unsustainable in law. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal filed by the Revenue by holding that the interest leviable for the period from 1.4.2003 to 2.9.2003 would be at the rate prescribed in the amended provisions of sub-rule (3) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002."

In passing : Incidentally, although the amendment was made in rule 8 on 01.03.2003 w.e.f 01.04.2003, the first illustration referred to default committed in respect of the goods cleared in the month of February and in respect of which duty was payable by the 5 th of March (this payment by the 5 th day of the following month itself was newly introduced w.e.f 01.04.2003). Be that as it may, take a look at the Illustration 1; the figure “A” has not been calculated and shown in the notification for reasons unknown –

Illustration 1- X, an assessee, fails to pay excise duty of Rs.31 lakhs payable on the goods cleared in February , by the 5 th of March . X pays the amount on 10th of March. The default has continued for 5 days. The interest payable by X is computed as follows:-

2% of the amount of default for 5 days

= 2% of Rs.31 lakhs x 5 / 31

= Rs.

- (A)

Rs.1000 per day of default

= 5 x Rs.1000

= Rs.5000

- (B)

The interest payable is the higher of the amounts (A) and (B).

By the way, we did not have DDT those days!

(See 2014-TIOL-509-CESTAT-MUM)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.


Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.