9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 644X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 28.07.2022 was issued to the appellant to demand service tax on import of intellectual property services along with interest and to impose penalties. The matter was adjusted on 26.04.2012 and demand of service tax was confirmed along with interest and penalty was also imposed. The said order was challenged by the appellant before this Tribunal and also made a deposit of Rs. 1,26,59,954/- under protest. This Tribunal vide Final Order dated 22.7.2016 held that no service tax is payable by the appellant hence the appellant filed refund claim on 03.08.2016. The said refund claim was entertained and a show cause notice was issued the appellant on 05.10.2016 proposing rejection of refund claim on account of unjust enrichment. The refund claim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are entitled to claim interest at the rate of 12%. In the light of the decisions of Parle Agro Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax, Noida (vice-versa) 2021 (5) TMI 870-CESTAT-ALLAHABD. 4. He further submitted that the appellant is entitled to claim interest from the date of deposit i.e, 19.01.2011 as it is not a duty or service tax and it is in nature of deposit, therefore, they are entitled to claim interest after three months of the date of the deposit only. In support of this contention he relied on the decision in case of CCE, Chennai-II vs. UCAL Fuel Systems Ltd. 2014 (306) ELT 26 (Mad.). 5. On the other hand, learned authorized representative appearing for the department opposed the contention of the learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deposit only for that the provisions of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act are not applicable. Consequently, interest prescribed under Section 11BB is also not applicable. In view of this following the decision in the case of Parle Agro Pvt. Ltd.(supra), I hold that appellant is entitled to claim interest at the rate of 12%. The same view was taken by the Tribunal in the case of Gajendra Singh Sankhla & others in Service Tax Appeal No. 50876, 50877, 50878 of 2024 vide Final Order No. 50597-50599/2025 dated 06.05.2025. 10. In that case also after relying the various judicial pronouncement, this Tribunal came to the conclusion that as the provisions of Section 11B are not applicable, consequently the appellant is entitled to claim intere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
