BISLERI INTERNATIONAL Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The impugned order affirmed demand of interest of Rs. 33,662/ - for the delay in reversing CENVAT credit irregularly availed in 2004 and 2005. The only ground taken by the appellants against the demand is that no notice was issued before demanding interest. The Consultant for appellants relies on a decision of a ld. Single Member of this Tribunal in the case of CCE, Madurai v. Madras Cements Limited (Final Order No. 922/05 dated 29.6.05) wherein it was held that, where duty had been paid voluntarily before issue of Show Cause Notice, interest was not leviable on the amount of duty under Section 11AB. The ld. SDR relies on a decision of this Tribunal in the case of CCE, Coimbatore v. Precot Mills Ltd. wherein it was held that, it was mandatory that when CENVAT credit had been taken wrongly the same shall be recovered along with interest. The relevant Rule 12 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002 mandated such payment.

(2.) I have carefully studied the case records and rival submissions. I find that in the impugned order affirming demand of interest by the original authority without issuing a Show Cause Notice, the lower appellate authority relied on the following observations of the apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Trade Tax, Lucknow v. Kanhai Ram Thekedar