SIGN IN SUBSCRIBE

News Update

New Income tax Code to be developed internally by CBDT, says Revenue SecretaryKejriwal to remain in judicial custody till Aug 8CCI approves combination involving Amazon Asia-Pacific, Frontizo, Appario, Haverl and CRPLUS economy grows by 2.8% in Q227 companies have cumulatively invested Rs 465 crore under PLI Scheme for IT HardwareCus - Adjudication proceedings initiated on the ground of 'illegal export' whereas seizure was on the belief that there is 'illegal import' - Clear lack of jurisdiction: HCIndonesia introduces golden visa programme to attract investmentCus - An assessee cannot be deprived of its justifiable money - Refund to be granted along with interest @8%, although Act provides interest @6% - Difference of 2% to be recovered from officers responsible and mention be made in their service records - Cost of Rs.1 lakh also payable: HCRailways deploys Kavach on 1465 Route km and 144 locomotives on South Central RailwayCus - It is settled law that Tribunal cannot travel beyond the scope of relief and the case made out in the show cause notice: HCHeavy rains batter Pune; 6 dead; Snafu at Mumbai AirportCus - RoSCTL Scheme - Right accrued pursuant to any law and/or Scheme in favour of the person cannot be denied merely due to any technical error and/or glitch: HC18.6 lakh candidates signed-up on 'FutureSkills PRIME' for Re-skilling of IT ManpowerST - Not only is the assessee a PSU but also if the tax had been paid on reverse charge basis, they would have been entitled to take credit - Net effect is the exercise is revenue neutral - Tribunal rightly set aside the penalty: HCSC Constitution Bench upholds rights of States to levy royalty on mineral taxGST - DRC-01 was not accompanied by SCN - Order passed - Violation of principles of natural justice - Orders set aside and matter remanded: HCAustralia notifies sanctions against Israel for West Bank violenceBudget 2024 plays unfair with property owners; redefines HNIs!Delhi HC imposes Rs 1 lakh fine for defaming judges on social mediaBudget 2024: A Comprehensive Perspective on GSTUS cautions tech start-ups on security threats from overseas investorsTaxonomy is not about taxesBudget for Vikasit BharatWill the Old Tax Regime be Consigned to A Margadarshak Role?
 
CX - Revenue authorities have no business to issue letter directing appellant to pay interest- in absence of invocation of s.11AA in SCN, demand is not sustainable: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, NOV 25, 2016: THE O-in-O dated June 1997 was upheld by the Tribunal in July 2003.

The jurisdictional authority issued a letter demanding interest, which was contested without success.

The appeal filed also did not find any favour and, therefore, the assessee is before the CESTAT.

It is submitted that the Tribunal in its order of July 2003 had clearly held that interest liability u/s 11AB does not arise. Moreover, the SCN which was issued demanding duty for clearances made between September 1991 to August 1996 did not invoke the provisions of Section 11AA for the demand of interest but invoked s.11AB. Pleading that the doctrine of merger would apply and interest liability would not arise, the appellant sought for dropping of the proceedings.

The AR while reiterating the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) submitted that the demand for the interest for the duty payment need not be invoked in the show-cause notice as it automatically follows the confirmed demand. So, also, section 11AA came into force from 26.8.1995, the AR submitted. In support, reliance is placed on the decision in Swan Mills Ltd. - 2015-TIOL-2097-HC-MUM-CX.

After considering the submissions, the Bench observed -

6. …I find that the demand for the interest liability under the provisions of Section 11AA by the letter dated 24.10.2005 and 18.11.2005 to me seems not in consonance with the law, inasmuch as the lower authorities have never invoked the provisions of Section 11AA of the Central Excise Act, 1944 in the show-cause notice issued to the appellant, which demanded the duty liability by invoking the extended period. The said show-cause notice was adjudicated and the demands were confirmed along with interest. Matter was carried to Tribunal and the Bench issued a final order dated 27.3.2003, were in paragraph 7 specifically recorded that the interest demand which has been made in the show-cause notice under Section 11AB is set aside, as section was inserted from 28.9.1996, the period in dispute was 1.8.1991 to 28.8.1996. Having set aside the demand by an order dated 27.3.2003, Revenue authorities have no business to issue letter on 24.10.2005, 2.11.2005 and 18.11.2008 directing the appellant to pay the interest in terms of Section 11AA of the Central Excise Act, 1944. It is a settled law that if demand is to be made for the interest liability, it was for the department to invoke such provisions in the show-cause notice. In the absence of any invocation of the provisions of Section 11AA in the show-cause notice, I find that the impugned order is not sustainable and liable to be set aside.”

The demand of interest was set aside and the appeal was allowed.

(See 2016-TIOL-3053-CESTAT-MUM)


 RECENT DISCUSSION(S) POST YOUR COMMENTS
   
 
Sub: Section 11AA interest

Sir, Section 11AA of CEA during the material period (1997)mandates payment of interest on the duty determined under erstwhile Section 11A(2) if the same was not paid within three months from the date of passing of the adj order. Not able to understand how Section 11AA as existed in 1997 could have been invoked before knowing whether assessee pays duty within 3 months of passing order or not.


Posted by rrkothapally rrkothapally
 

TIOL Tube Latest

TIOL Tube
Dr. Shailendra Kumar, Chairman, TIOL Knowledge Foundation, addressing the gathering

TOP NEWS


AR not Afar by SK Rahman

VISION 360



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

TII LATEST

TIOLCORPLAWS LATEST