2012 (10) TMI 342 - AT - Central Excise

Interest on refund - appellants were availing the benefit of exemption Notification No. 1/93-C.E. and the officers when they visited informed the appellant that since the unit was registered with DGTD, benefit of SSI exemption was not available and they were compelled to pay an amount of Rs. 6,25,000 Held that - Excise authorities had collected the amount as tax without the authority of law and therefore interest should be paid from the date of collection till the date of actual repayments - appellant is eligible for interest

Summary

Issues:
1. Refund claim filed by the appellant seeking refund of the amount deposited towards duty.
2. Eligibility of the appellant for interest on the refunded amount.
3. Dispute regarding the nature of the amount deposited by the appellant.

Issue 1: Refund Claim
The appellant's company had deposited an amount towards duty after a visit by officers, without any show cause notice being issued. A refund claim was filed by the appellant on 30-4-1997, seeking refund of the deposited amount. The claim was initially returned as premature since proceedings were ongoing. Subsequently, a show cause notice was issued in 1999, leading to the confirmation of duty demand, interest, and penalty. However, an appeal against this decision was allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in 2004, which became final as no further appeal was filed.

Issue 2: Eligibility for Interest
The Commissioner (Appeals) later held in 2008 that the appellant was eligible for a refund of the deposited amount in cash, leaving the decision on interest to the original adjudicating authority. Following this, the principal amount was sanctioned in 2009, and the appellant sought interest on the amount paid after three months from the date of the application. The original adjudicating authority allowed interest from a later date, which the appellant contested, seeking interest for a different period.

Issue 3: Nature of Deposited Amount
The appellant argued that the amount deposited was coerced and not duty or pre-deposit, as no proceedings were initiated until the refund claim was filed. Citing legal precedents, the appellant contended that interest should be paid from the date of payment of duty to the date of refund. Alternatively, it was argued that even if the refund was not admissible post the original adjudicating authority's decision, interest should be paid for the period before that decision.

In the case analysis, the Tribunal considered previous decisions involving similar scenarios where interest was deemed payable from the date of deposit without legal authority until the date of refund. Relying on legal precedents and the provisions of Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the Tribunal found the appellant eligible for interest from a specified period. The Tribunal emphasized that the appellant's situation aligned with past cases where interest was granted due to the unauthorized collection of amounts by excise authorities. Consequently, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, granting interest for the period specified in the judgment.