Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Micromatic Grinding Technologies Ltd. Versus CCE, Ghaziabad

2015 (11) TMI 703 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Interest claim - Delayed refund - whether, the appellant is eligible for interest in terms of Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for delayed sanction of refund amount beyond the period of three months from the date of filing the claim application - Held that:- Refund application, complete in all respect was filed by the appellant on 20.10.2011 and documents namely, ER-I return and the copy of PLA for the relevant period subsequently desired by the Original Authority and submitted by th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

I am of the firm view that the date of filing the refund application by the appellant on 20.10.2011 should be taken into consideration for the purpose of determination / computation of the interest liability. Therefore, in view of the fact that the refund application filed by the appellant on 20.10.2011 was ultimately entertained and sanctioned by the original authority on 31.08.2012, which is beyond the statutory time limit prescribed under section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, in my opinion .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

PER: S.K. MOHANTY Short question involved in this appeal for consideration by this Tribunal, is as to whether, the appellant is eligible for interest in terms of Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for delayed sanction of refund amount beyond the period of three months from the date of filing the claim application. 2. Brief facts of the case are that on 20.10.2011, the appellant filed the refund application before the jurisdictional Central Excise Authorities, claiming refund of excess .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

al before the Commissioner (Appeals), who vide order dated 22.05.2012, allowed the appeal by way of remand and directed the original authority to re-consider the refund claim subject to verification of relevant documents/ records. Pursuant to the said remand directions, the original authority completed the denovo adjudication proceedings based on the available records and those furnished by the appellant during such proceedings vide Order-in-Original dated 31.08.2012, allowing the refund claim i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y the Department. Hence, the present appeal before this Tribunal. 3. I have heard the ld. Counsel for both the sides and perused the records. 4. Ld. Consultant appearing for the appellant submits that as per the statutory mandates, the refund has to be sanctioned within three months from the date of filing of the application, claiming refund of the excess paid duty; and that if the refund is sanctioned beyond such time limit, then the interest is required to be paid under Section 11BB of the Act .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on to the buyer of the goods, the submissions of the ld. Counsel is that the unjust enrichment aspect has been dealt with by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order dated 22.05.2012, holding that the excess /double payment of duty has not been recovered from the customers. To justify his stand that the appellant is entitled for interest, the ld. Counsel has relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Topland Exports vs. CCE, Rajkot reported in 2013 (297) ELT 298 (Tri. Ahmd.). 5. On the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed within three months of receipt of application, then the applicant is entitled for interest at the prescribed rate from the date immediately after expiry of three months from the receipt of such application, till the date of refund of such duty. In the present case, the fact is not in dispute that the refund application, complete in all respect was filed by the appellant on 20.10.2011 and documents namely, ER-I return and the copy of PLA for the relevant period subsequently desired by the Orig .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version