S.T. COTTEX EXPORTS (P) LTD. Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts given rise to this appeal, in brief, are as under:

(2.) HEARD both sides.

(3.) SHRI Hemant Bajaj, Advocate, learned Counsel for the respondents, while conceding that in view of the Supreme Court judgment in the case of SKF India Ltd. (supra) interest on duty paid under supplementary invoices is chargeable as per provisions of Section 11AB, demand of interest is subject to the limitation period prescribed under Section 11A; that the Tribunal in the case of C.C., Madras v. T.V.S. Whirlpool Ltd. reported in : 1996 (86) ELT 144 (Tribunal) has held that where no time limit is prescribed for demand/recovery of interest under Section 47 and 61(3) of the Customs Act, 1962 the time limit of six months or five years, as the case may be, as provided under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 would be applicable; that the Government went in appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against this judgment and the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the appeal; that in view of this judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court, the limitation period prescribed for recovery of duty under Section 11A should also be available for recovery of interest chargeable under Section 11AB; that since in this case duty under supplementary invoices had been paid during the period from 16.9.2003 to 13.8.2004 and the show cause notice for recovery of interest had been issued only on 31.3.2006 and that since the show cause notice does not even allege, wilful mis -statement or suppression of facts, etc. normal period of limitation would be applicable, and hence, the show cause notice is time barred.