Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2023 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 176 - AT - Central ExciseRefund claim alongwith interest - duty paid under protest - unjust enrichment - SSI Exemption - clubbing of clearances - clearances beyond exemption limit - denial of benefit of exemption Notification dated 01.03.1978 - HELD THAT:- The said issue has been settled by this Tribunal vide its Order dated 06.10.1986, wherein this Tribunal has observed that appellants cannot be denied the benefit of Notification No. 71/78. In view of the orders dated 06.10.1986, 15.12.1986 & 25.10.1989 of this Tribunal, the appellants filed various refund claims on various occasions in the years 1986 and 1989. Thereafter, various show-cause notices were issued to the appellants to deny the said refund claim on the ground that the said refund claims are barred by limitation and the provisions laid down under Rule 233B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for payment of duty under protest have not been observed by the appellants. The refund claims were rejected , but on appeal the ld.Commissioner (Appeals) of Allahabad & Calcutta, held that the duty was paid under protest after following the procedure of Rule 233B and hence refund claim cannot be treated as time barred and remanded back the matter to the Assistant Commissioner for entertaining the refund claim, but the refund claims were rejected on the ground of unjust enrichment on 31st January, 1992. On going through the said and the certificate issued by the recipient of the goods, it is clear that the duty component has been borne by the appellants themselves. Moreover, the appellants have cleared the good to Bihar State Electricity Board under IBRD Financed Project and for the said clearance, the appellant is not liable to pay duty at all on their clearance, but the fact that the appellants were denied the benefit of SSI exemption, therefore, the appellants paid duty under protest and cleared their goods. Unjust enrichment - HELD THAT:- The adjudicating authority has gone beyond the scope of show-cause notice for entertaining the refund claim. As from the facts itself, it is clear that the appellants were not required to pay any duty on the goods cleared to BSED and not collected any duty from BSED. Moreover, the duty has been paid by the appellants themselves, we hold that the appellants have passed the bar of unjust enrichment. Interest - HELD THAT:- The appellants are entitled to claim the interest after three months from the filing of the refund claim till realization. Therefore, the interest allowed to the appellants after three months from the date of filing of the refund claim till its realization and the interest shall be paid at the rate of 12% as held by this Tribunal in the case M/S SHREE RAJASTHAN SYNTEX LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX (COMMISSIONERATE) RAJASTHAN [2023 (7) TMI 950 - CESTAT NEW DELHI]. All the appeals are allowed.
|