9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 947X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... resent case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of electrical switches and electrical accessories falling under Chapter 85 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 since Sept. 1995. The DGCEI staff, Ludhiana searched the premises of appellant and directed the appellant to deposit Rs. 10 lakhs on 18.03.2010 during the investigation; thereafter, the show cause notice dated 01.09.2010 was issued by Ld. Additional Director, DGCEI (RU), Ludhiana demanding duty, interest by invocation of penal provisions. Thereafter, the Addl. Commissioner, vide Order-in-Original dated 21.09.2017 confirmed the demand and imposed penalty under Rule 26 clause (i) of Central Excise Rules, 2002. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed the appeal b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uring investigation and @ 12% per annum till the refund is paid. In support of his submissions, he relied upon the various decisions: * Amidhara Texturising (P) Ltd. Vs. Commr. Of Central Excise, Surat - 2012 (278) E.L.T. 257 (Tri. - Ahmd.) * G.S. Promotors & Developers Vs. Commissioner of CGST, Ludhiana Hon'ble Cestat Final Order No. 60703/2023 dt. 11.12.2023 * Impressive Management Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. C.G. & S.T., Chandigarh Hon'ble Cestat Final Order No.60090/2023 dt. 06.04.2023 * Pr. Commr. Of CGST, New Delhi Vs. Emmar MGF Construction Pvt. Ltd. 2021 (55) G.S.T.L. 311 (Tri. -Del.) * Churchit International Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Exports), New Delhi - Hon'ble Cestat Final Order No. 58537/2024 dt. 06.09.2024 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gation is required to be computed @ 12% per annum. I also find that the jurisdictional High Court of this Tribunal has already held that rate of interest applicable in such cases is 12% per annum as held in the cases of CCE, Panchkula Vs. Riba Textiles Limited, reported in 2022 (5) TMI 1531 - Punjab and Haryana High Court and Sunrise Immigration Consultants Private Limited Vs. Union of India reported in 2023 (6) TMI 411. 8. Further, I find that this Tribunal has followed the ratio of the High court decision in the cases of Sunrise Immigration Consultants Private Limited Vs.CGST-Chandigarh Reported in 2023 (4) TMI 504 CESTAT, Chandigarh and Impressive Management Solutions Pvt. Ltd Vs. CGST, Chandigarh, 2023 (4) TMI 433 - CESTAT Chandigarh. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er annum till the refund is made. The relevant findings of the Hon'ble High Court in para 11 of its order is reproduced herein below : "11. The Tribunal has given adequate reasons in both the orders impugned, including the order by which the Department's application for correction or modification was rejected. According to the Tribunal, the deposit was made at a time when no quantified claim had been made on the assessee. On such basis, the Tribunal found that the deposit had not been made on account of any duty or interest which would attract the implied bar under Section 11B of the Act. It was a possible view taken on the set of facts that presented themselves before the Tribunal and, in this appellate jurisdiction, such interpretat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
