TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 140X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led only on 06.07.2004. In terms of Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, the interest liability of the Department for delay in payment of refund under Section 11B arises, only when there is delay beyond 3 months from the date of filing of the refund application. Thus, appeal is dismissed. - Excise Appeal No. 10499 of 2020-SM - Final Order No. A/11132/2022 - Dated:- 8-9-2022 - MR. RAJU, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Counsel for the appellant has relied on the decision of Safal Food Products-2022 (8) TMI 102-CESTAT NEW DELHI, Riba Textile- 2020 (2) TMI 602-CESTAT CANDIGARH and Futura Ceramics Pvt Ltd-2017 (12) TMI 701-CESTAT AHMEDABAD pass by Single Member Bench similar issues. 3. On the other hand the Revenue has relied on the decision in case of Ratnamani Metals Tubes Ltd-2018 (8) TMI 539- CESTAT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hem. Thus, once the Addl. Commissioner held that the appellants activity amounts to manufacture and confirmed the duty demand of Rs. 17.59 Lakhs against them and appropriated Rs. 10.00 Lakhs as payment towards their assessed duty liability, the Rs. 10.00 Lakhs earlier paid by them becomes the payment of duty by the appellant towards assessed duty liability and cleared to be an amount paid on ad h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be filed by the assessee. The refund application was filed only on 6-7-2004. In terms of Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, the interest liability of the Department for delay in payment of refund under Section 11B arises, only when there is delay beyond 3 months from the date of filing of the refund application. Since in this case refund application had been made on 6-7-2004, the interest lia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rloskar Auto Parts Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore (supra) cited by the ld. Counsel for the appellant are not application to the facts of this case. In view of this, we do not find any merit in this appeal. The appeal is dismissed. 4. I find that the issue involved in the case of Gyal M G Gases P Ltd is identical and the facts are also similar. The decision of Division Bench i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
