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

Fedders Lloyd Co. Ltd. Versus C.C.E. NOIDA

2016 (10) TMI 448 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

Interest on delayed refund - whether the interest on delayed refund to the appellant is to be paid from the expiry of three months from the date of fling of refund claim or from the date of order of refund made - refund application was submitted on 20.05.2002 and refund was sanctioned on 29.12.2005 - Held that:- the Hon'ble Supreme Court has ruled that respondent has to pay interest under Section 11BB of Central Excise Act, 1944, from the date of expiry of three months from the date of receipt o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

stant Commissioner) A.R. ORDER Brief facts of the case are that the appellant filed claim of refund of ₹ 41,44,452/- on finalization of provisional assessment on 20/05/2002. Through Order-in-Original dated 20/12/2002 the refund was granted but was credited to Consumer Welfare Fund. The appellant filed appeal against said Order-in-Original dated 20/12/2002 before the Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida. The Id. Commissioner (Appeals) through Order-in-Appeal dated 19.8.2004 held that the a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e High Court was pleased to pass the order dated 25.11.2005, directing the petitioner to file a fresh comprehensive representation before the concerned authority and directing the concerned competent authority to decide the same within four weeks of the receipt of such representation. In pursuance of the directions of the Hon'ble High Court at Allahabad, Assistant Commissioner through Order-in-Original dated 29/12/2005, granted refund of ₹ 25,60,615.29/-. However, the said order was si .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ithin one month from the order passed by Tribunal. The appellant preferred appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) against Order-in-Original dated 29/9/2006, stating that the finding of original authority was contrary to Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944, Commissioner (Appeals) through Order-in-Appeal No. 44/CE/APPL/Noida/07 dated 25.4.2007 rejected the appeal. 2. Aggrieved by the said Order-in-Appeal dated 25/4/2007, the appellant before us. 3. The grounds of appeal inter alia are that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rein the explanation to said Section has provided that where any order of refund is made by the Commissioner (Appeals), Appellant Tribunal or any Court against an order of Assistant or Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise under Sub Section 2 of 11BB, the order passed by such Appellant Authority or the Court shall be deemed to have been passed under the sub-Section 2 for the purpose of said Section 11BB. Further said Section 11BB has provided that, if any, order for refund of duty is passed afte .....

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
 


|| 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