COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BANGALORE-III COMMISSIONERATE, C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE- 560001 Vs. M/S. KAMAL BELLS, NO. A-92/2, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560044

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revenue has preferred these appeals challenging the order passed by the Tribunal which held that no interest is payable on the duty paid on supplementary invoices.

(2.) THE assessee is engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods. Despite having Central Excise Registration there was delay in payment of duty by the assessee. The said duty liability was due to the reason that purchase orders price got enhanced subsequently after the negotiation. The assessing authority held that the assessee should have discharged the duty liability along with interest. However, the assessee contended that they had discharged the duty liability as soon as they were informed about the escalation in the price and hence they are not liable to pay interest and penalty. The adjudicating authority did not accept the said stand. Therefore, it confirmed the demand of interest but refrained from imposing penalty on the appellant. The Commissioner (Appeals), set aside the adjudication order and directed that the lower authority to impose appropriate penalty. The assessee preferred an appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal not only set aside the imposition of penalty but also set aside the confirmation of payment of interest. An appeal came to be filed before this Court. This Court in Appeal No. 46/2006 upheld the order of the Tribunal in so far as setting aside the penalty is concerned but in so far as the interest is concerned, the matter was remitted back to the Tribunal for consideration afresh. On such remand the Tribunal has held relying on the Judgment of the Gujarat High Court in The Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs Vs. Chloritech Industries, (2009) 235 ELT 17 (Guj.) that there is no liability to pay interest Aggrieved by the said order, the revenue is in appeal.

(3.) THEREFORE the order of the Tribunal that the interest is not liable to be paid on the corrected value is erroneous and requires to be set aside. However, in the aforesaid Judgment this Court after holding that the interest is liable to be paid has given the benefit to the assessee on the basis of the Circular/Instruction F. No. 390/Misc./163/2010JE/2010 JC in respect of Litigation -Monetary limits for department Appeals before CESTAT and High Courts. The reasoning adopted by this Court in the aforesaid Judgment granting the benefit to the assessee equally applies in this case also. Accordingly, we pass the following order: -