Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2019 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 507 - AT - Central ExciseInterest on delayed refunds - Refund of accumulated CENVAT credit - claim for interest for the period upto March 16, 2005 - HELD THAT:- it has been held right up to the Hon’ble Supreme Court that the insistence on the Department’s part that Rasoi paid in cash from PLA the duty was illegal and that Rasoi was entitled to utilize the credit lying in its RG -23B Part II Register and could not be forced to pay the said duty in cash. The interest has been claimed for the period from the respective dates of payments of the said duty in cash vide TR-6 challans upto the date of its refund dated March 16, 2005 when the said duty paid was allowed to be credited back in the PLA - In the instant case we find that the duties were not payable by Rasoi in cash but it was permissible for it to utilize the credit balance in RG-23B Part II Register for paying the same. This legal position was settled in favour of Rasoi right upto the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The said duties were paid in cash by making deposits vide TR-6 challans and then entered in PLA. The said duties were paid due to insistence on the Department’s part who prevented Rasoi from utilizing the credit lying in RG-23B Part-II Register, although entitled to - the Department is bound to pay Rasoi interest, as has been correctly held by the Commissioner (Appeals). Interest on duties of ₹ 4.10 crores for the period from three months after the date of filing the refund application till the date of refund - HELD THAT:- The undisputed facts are that the refund application was filed on January 19, 2006 and the period of three months expired on April 18, 2006, but, however, the refund was granted on December 24, 2009. Hence, as per Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, the Department is liable to pay statutory interest from April 19, 2006 to December 23, 2009 - the Commissioner (Appeals) has correctly allowed the claim for interest for the period April 19, 2006 to December 23,2009 on the duty amount of ₹ 4.10 crores. Claim for interest on delayed payment of interest - HELD THAT:- This issue is no more res integra. It has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUJARAT VERSUS GUJARAT FLUORO CHEMICALS [2013 (10) TMI 117 - SUPREME COURT] , that it is a misinterpretation of this case that the Revenue is obliged to pay interest on interest in the event of its failure to refund the interest payable within the statutory period and that in the said case, considering the inordinate delay in payment, the Hon’ble Supreme Court had directed the Revenue to pay compensation for the same and not an interest on interest. Accordingly to the Hon’ble Supreme Court it is only interest provided for under the statute which can be claimed by an assessee from the Revenue and no other interest on such statutory interest can be claimed - the Commissioner (Appeals) had rightly rejected the claim of Rasoi for interest on delayed payment of interest. Appeal allowed in part.
|