DYNAMIC ELECTRICALS Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal filed by M/s. Dynamic Electricals the issues involved are whether the price realized by them should be treated as cum -duty price, and whether the interest on duty is payable by them.

(2.) Shri V.K. Gupta, learned Advocate, submitted that the Department has confirmed the demand of duty and imposed penalty and demanded interest on the ground that they were clearing wires and cables bearing the brand name of other person; that the Department has also not treated the price realized by them from their customers as cum -duty price; that it has been held by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Srt Chakra Tyres v. CCE that the amount realized from the customers has to be treated as inclusive of the duty element; that the said Larger Bench decision is consistently being followed by the Tribunal and the appeal filed by the Revenue has also been dismissed by the Supreme Court as reported in (165) ELT A 175 (SC). He also relied upon the Judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CCE, Delhi v. Maruti Udyog Ltd.. The learned Advocate, further, submitted that the Appellants were manufacturing and clearing branded goods as well as unbranded goods and were availing the SSI Exemption benefit; that in a case where the assessee avails of SSI Exemption benefit the payment of fortnightly duty cannot be fastened upon them; that therefore, any calculation of interest on fortnightly basis is absolutely wrong. Finally he submitted that as there was no mala fide intention no penalty is imposable on the Appellants.

(3.) Countering the arguments Smt. Krishna A. Mishra, learned SDR, submitted that as the Appellants had cleared the branded goods without payment of duty penalty is imposable on them. She finally submitted that as SSI Exemption benefit is not available in respect of branded goods the Appellants cannot be treated as SSI unit for the purpose of branded goods, and therefore, calculation of interest on fortnightly basis is within the purview of law.