IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.E.A. No.284 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 17.2.2011 Commissioner of Central Excise. -----Appellant. Vs. M/s Krishna Engineering Works Ltd (Unit-III). -----Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present:- Mr. H.P.S. Ghuman, Standing Counsel for the appellant. --- ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short, “the Act”) against the order of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi dated 18.1.2010, Annexure A-4, proposing to raise following substantial question of law:- “Whether payment/recovery of interest, in terms of Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Explanation 2 to the sub-section (2B) of the Section 11A, is also covered by the limitation under section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 in case of suo moto payment of duty made by the party in terms of sub-section (2B) of the Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944.? C.E.A. No.284 of 2010 Learned counsel for the revenue fairly states that in view of amount involved in this appeal being about Rs.40,000/-, this Court need not go into the merits. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed . (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE February 17, 2011 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) ashwani JUDGE 2