TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 1232X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red to pay interest on the refund amount paid belatedly. The time limit for payment of the refund amount to the respondent by the Central Excise authorities (without interest) expired on 18-6-1998. Since, claimed amount was finally paid to the respondent on 22-8-2005, the respondent is entitled for the statutory interest from 19-6-1998 to the date when the refund was eventually paid, i.e., 22-8-2005 Appeal rejected - decided against Revenue. - E/319/2007-SM - Final Order No. A/22109/2014 - Dated:- 10-7-2014 - Shri S.K. Mohanty, Member (J) Shri Ganesh Haavanur, Additional Commissioner (AR), for the Appellant. Shri Raghavendra B., Advocate, for the Respondent. ORDER This appeal filed by the Revenue appellant is di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fund amount. The said interest amount was computed by the respondent from the date of filing the original refund application, till its sanction by the Department. On 8-9-2006, the said interest claim application was rejected by the original authority, holding that payment of interest under Section 11BB of the Act does not arise. Appeal filed by the respondent against the said order was allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order dated 23-2-2007, holding that the respondent is entitled for interest for the period from 19-6-1998 to 22-8-2005 (i.e. the date immediately after the expiry of three months from the date of application, till the date of refund of the duty amount). Being aggrieved with the said impugned order, the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g to the provisions of Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the respondent is entitled for interest for the period from 19-6-1998 to 22-8-2005 (i.e. the date immediately after the expiry of three months from the date of application, till the date of refund of the duty amount). He has cited the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Union of India [2011 (273) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.)] to justify the stand for claim of interest. 5. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the records. The issue involved in the present case for determination by this Tribunal is as to whether the respondent is entitled to get the interest for the period of delay in late sanction of the refund amount. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the date of receipt of such refund application. 8. An explanation has been appended to Section 11BB of the Act, which introduced the deeming fiction that in case of any order of refund passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Appellate Tribunal or any Court against the order of Assistant/Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise under sub-section (2) of Section 11B of the Act, the order passed by such Appellate Authorities or by the Court(s) shall be deemed to be an order passed under such sub-section. 9. On a conjoint reading of Sections 11B and 11BB of the Act (discussed supra), it transpires that once an order is passed by the competent Central Excise authorities pursuant to the refund application filed by the applicant, then the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... finally paid. The explanation inserted in Section 11B of the Act has nothing to do with the deferment of the date from which interest becomes payable. The issue in the present case regarding payment of interest on delayed refund of the Central Excise duty amount is no more res integra, in view of the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court delivered in the case of M/s. Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Union of India, reported in 2011 (273) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.). The relevant paragraph of the said judgment is extracted herein below :- 9. .Section 11BB of the Act comes into play only after an order for refund has been made under Section 11B of the Act. Section 11BB of the Act lays down that in case any duty paid is found refundable and if the duty is n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om which interest under Section 11BB of the Act becomes payable. 11. The case laws cited by the learned AR for Revenue have no application to the facts of the present case. In the case of Coronation Spinning and Indian Thermoplastics (supra), the refund applications were filed consequent upon the orders passed by the Appellate Tribunal; whereas, in the present case, the refund application was filed by the respondent prior to the date of order of the Appellate Commissioner in allowing the appeal with consequential benefits. The issue involved in the case of ITC Ltd. and Eastern Coils (supra) relates to payment of interest on delayed refund of the pre-deposited amount; whereas, in the case in hand, dispute pertains to payment of interest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
