Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2019 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (3) TMI 1096 - HC - Central ExciseInterest on delayed refunds - time period for calculation of interest - section 11BB of the Central excise Act - Held that:- The High Court of Gujarat in the case of Commissioner, Central Excise vs Reliance Industries Limited [2010 (10) TMI 190 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT], while considering a similar canvas against the payment of interest on delayed refunds under Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, in terms of the obligation to refund under Rule 5 of the CENVET Credit Rules & Notification dated 18.6.2012, did not accept the canvas on behalf of the revenue that the scheme for refund of unutilized CENVAT Credit is a special beneficial scheme with self contained procedure providing for the manner and method of its implementation, and hence any refund claimed under the Rules would be governed only by the provisions of the Scheme and the general provisions of Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act cannot be resorted to - the High Court of Gujarath held that when there is delay in sanctioning the refund under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules & Notification dated 18.6.2012, the provisions of Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act would be clearly attracted. The learned counsel for the appellant–revenue is unable to persuade this court to hold that the obligation to refund unutilized CEVANT Credit under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules & Notification dated 18.6.2012 is distinct and separate from the obligation under Section 11B of the Act. This Court concurs with the reasons assigned in the aforesaid decisions to hold that the revenue would be obliged to pay under interest for the delayed refund as contemplated under Section 11BB of the Act even for the delayed refund of the Unutilized CENVAT credit under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules & Notification dated 18.6.2012. This court is of the considered opinion that no substantial questions arise for consideration - appeal dismissed.
|