9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 686X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whereas, C.E.A. No. 88 of 2007 is filed against the Appeal No. E/1198 of 2005 on the file of the C.E.S.T.A.T., Bangalore. 2. Since in both the appeals, the questions of law arise for consideration by this Court are one and the same concerning the same parties, we dispose of the appeals by the following common judgment. 3. We have heard Sri Bhaskar Reddy Vemireddy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant in both the appeals and Sri A. Rajasekhar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Central Excise in both the appeals. 4. The appellant company, which was engaged in business of manufacture and sale of LPG cylinders, the appellant in C.E.A. No. 87 of 2007 had paid excess excise duty to the tune of Rs. 39,40,086/- for the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Commissioner, Central Excise, Abids, Hyderabad. The Commissioner of Appeals, Central Excise, Hyderabad allowed the appeals by his order dated 21-4-2005 and vide proceedings dated 31-4-2005 the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise has refunded the excess duty paid by the appellant. However, in his order, no interest-cum-refund amount was granted and the appellant once again made an application to the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise for grant of interest by letter dated 3-5-2005. 6. On refusal, by the Assistant Commissioner to grant interest vide proceedings dated 24-5-2005, the appellant preferred appeal before the Commissioner of Appeals and the Commissioner of Appeals in Appeal Nos. 118 & 119 of 2005 set aside the order pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... purchase price of LPG cylinders was not finalized by the time of clearance of goods and therefore, (2) Whether the appellant is entitled for interest from the date of payment till the date of refund under Section 11B(2) of the Central Excise Act on the difference of excise duty. 9. The contention of the appellant that the applications for refund were submitted on 4-1-2001, 8-3-2001 and 5-10-2001 and the appellant in C.E.A. No. 88 of 2007 filed applications on 10-7-1999, 4-11-2000, 20-3-2001 and 24-11-2002 for finalization of assessments and to refund the excess duty paid is opposed by the respondent on the ground that they have not claimed any specific amount for refund of duty under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and suc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date of refund of such duty. In Union of India and Another v. Shreeji Colour Chem Industries - (2008) 9 SCC 515 = 2008 (230) E.L.T. 199 (S.C.), the Supreme Court dealing with appropriate procedure relating to claim of interest on refund held as follows : "If a claim of interest is on equitable grounds, a written demand therefore is imperative. Where the respondent made a written demand of interest on 12-1-2004, as per Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the interest shall be paid on refund after expiry of three months from the date of application for such interest. But the interest could not have been given from 24-7-1991 i.e. the first day on which the Assistant Collector rejected the prayer for refund because no wr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
