TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 762X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held that as per the instructions issued by the Central Government refunds under Rule 57F of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944 would be governed by the provisions of Section 11BB of the Act. Rule 57F of the said Rules made provision for the manner of utilisation of inputs and credit allowed in respect of duty paid thereon. Sub-rule (13) of rule 57F made provision for refund of accumulated c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant have filed five quarterly refund claims for the period from April 2006 to September 2007 amounting to ₹ 70,21,422/- under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. An amount of ₹ 15,82,442/- was sanctioned within time but ₹ 54,38,980/- was sanctioned with much delay i.e. on 27.3.2009. The appellant claimed interest on the dela ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Vs. UOI - 2016 (342) ELT 17 (Bom.) involving similar facts and circumstances. He has also referred to the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited Vs. UOI - 2011 (273) ELT 3 (SC). 5. Ld. A.R. for the Revenue submits that there is no provision to allow interest on the interest amount as claimed by the Appellant. In support, he has referred to the judg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such goods/services when utilised for further manufacture or providing service which are dutiable already carry the duty paid component as a part of its price/value, and hence the duty payable on the ultimately manufactured goods/services rendered stands reduced to the extent of duty already paid on the inputs. Thus the duty paid on inputs by the supplier has already been actually received by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f expiry of three months of filing the respective claim. I agree with the contention of the ld. A.R. for the Revenue that interest on the interest amount is not admissible in view of Larger Bench decision in Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Limited s case (supra). In the result, the impugned order is modified and the appeal is allowed to the extent mentioned as above. Appeal disposed. - - Ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
