TMI Blog2010 (8) TMI 814X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er (Appeals) who allowed the refund claim to the appellants vide order dated 29-10-1999. The order was not challenged by the department and same had attained finality, but the Assistant Commissioner again rejected the refund claim vide its order dated 7-8-2001. The same was again challenged before the Commissioner (Appeals), who also rejected the claim vide his order dated 23-2-2002. The appellants came before this Tribunal and this Tribunal had allowed the refund claim vide its order dated 26-3-2006. Again the Assistant Commissioner rejected the refund claim to the party vide its order dated 26-2-2007. The appellants again preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who also rejected the refund claim vide its order dated 3-9-2007 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entitled for interest after three months from the date of their application for refund. In this case, the provisions of Section 11BB came in force w.e.f. 26-5-1995 although the refund claim was filed on 8-1-1990, the appellants be given the interest after three months from 26-5-1995. 4. On the other hand, the learned DR submitted that this refund claim had attained finality vide order of this Tribunal dated 18-2-2008 and thereafter the refund claim has been issued within three months. Hence, there is no question of interest on delayed refund. 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. 6. On careful examination of the case records, I find that Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 deals with the situation where the assessee i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... als), Appellate Tribunal or, as the case may be, by the court shall be deemed to be an order passed under the said sub- section (2) for the purposes of this section.] On perusal of the above said provisions, it is clear that in case any duty is found refundable then if the duty is not refunded within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the application under Section 11B of the Act then interest on the amount is liable to be paid on expiry of a period of three months from the date of receipt of the application. The explanation of Section 11BB of the Act shows that it introduces deeming fiction that where the order for refund of duty paid is made not by the Assistant Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner, but is made by the C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able as the officers did not pay any respect to the order of this Tribunal dated 6-3-2006 and again rejected the refund claim. If the Revenue was aggrieved really to sanctioning of the refund claim, they would have been preferred an appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) sanctioning the refund claim dated 29-10-1999, which Revenue has failed to do so. Hence, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellants are entitled for interest on the refund claim w.e.f. the date of expiry of three months after 29-10-1999. The case law cited by the learned Advocate in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-III v. Ballarpur Industries Ltd. reported in 2008 (229) E.L.T. 498 (Bom.), Swaraj Mazda Ltd. v. UOI reported in 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
