2010 (7) TMI 322 - AT - Central Excise

Duty under protest assessee eligible for benefit of Notification No. 22/2003-C.E paid duty under protest refund claim on receipt of refund claim SCN issued demand of duty Held that - no confirmation of demand along with interest - since there is no demand, any amount paid by the assessee cannot be held back by the Revenue authorities - application for waiver of pre-deposit of amounts involved is allowed appeal is disposed of

Summary

Issues:
1. Liability to pay central excise duty on goods cleared under specific provisions.
2. Validity of refund claim and subsequent show cause notice.
3. Appeal against the sanctioning order by the adjudicating authority.

Analysis:
1. The primary issue in this case revolves around the liability of the appellant to pay central excise duty on goods cleared under Rule 19 and 20 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The appellant operates under the benefit of a specific notification for clearances made to a particular entity, subject to re-warehousing conditions. The audit party directed the appellant to deposit an amount concerning goods cleared under a specific arrangement. The appellant paid this amount under protest and later filed a refund claim. The adjudicating authority sanctioned the refund claim and did not confirm the demand. However, the Revenue, aggrieved by this decision, appealed to the Commissioner (Appeals), who directed the appellant to remit back the amount sanctioned by the adjudicating authority.

2. Upon careful examination of the proceedings, it is evident that there was no confirmation of the demand amount along with interest, which the appellant paid under protest. The absence of a confirmed demand implies that the amount paid cannot be considered as payable by the appellant. The Tribunal noted that the impugned order requiring the appellant to remit the amount back to the Revenue authorities should be stayed. It was observed that in the absence of a confirmed demand, any amount paid by the appellant should not be withheld by the Revenue authorities. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the application for waiver of pre-deposit of the amounts involved and stayed the recovery until the appeal's disposal.

3. The Tribunal's decision to stay the recovery of the amount paid by the appellant under protest showcases a crucial legal interpretation regarding the absence of a confirmed demand. The Tribunal emphasized that without a formal confirmation of the demand, the appellant cannot be compelled to remit the amount back to the Revenue authorities. This ruling ensures fairness and procedural correctness in dealing with disputed amounts and highlights the importance of due process in tax matters. The Tribunal's meticulous analysis and decision provide clarity on the legal principles governing the payment and recovery of disputed amounts in the context of central excise duty liabilities and refund claims.