2019 (1) TMI 1724 - AT - Central Excise

Interest on delayed refund - whether the appellant is entitled to interest on refund from 26-8-1995 (i.e. three months after the Finance Bill 1995 was assented to by the President) or from 27-9-2002 when the CESTAT ruled that the appellant is entitled to refund and the provisions of unjust enrichment would not apply? HELD THAT - The proviso to Section 11BB requires the interest to be paid from 26-8-1995 - Interest is payable with reference to the date of application for refund. It does not matter if they were denied refund initially and succeed at some appellate stage. The relevant date will still be the date of application for applications made post 1995. For applications made before it becomes payable from 26-8-1995 as per the proviso to Section 11BB. The Learned first appellate authority has clearly erred in violating the statutory provisions and sanctioning refund from the date he considered fair - The appellant is entitled to interest on refund from 26-8-1995 till the date of payment of refund. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Claim for refund of duty paid under protest, application of concessional rate of duty, unjust enrichment, entitlement to interest on refund, application of Section 11BB.

Analysis:
The appellants, manufacturers of paper board, claimed refund of duty paid under protest due to denial of concessional rate of duty at 50%. The Tribunal initially decided in favor of the appellants, leading to subsequent appeals and orders in favor of the appellants. The issue of unjust enrichment arose, leading to the sanctioning of partial refund and crediting the rest to the consumer welfare fund. The appellant claimed interest on the refunded amount, which was rejected by the Asst. Commissioner, citing a pending appeal before the Supreme Court.

The appellant appealed the interest rejection, arguing that interest should be payable from 26-8-1995 as their application was made prior to the introduction of Section 11BB. The first appellate authority sanctioned refund from 27-9-2002, rejecting interest from 26-8-1995 to 27-9-2002. The appellant contended that interest should be paid from 26-8-1995 as per the proviso to Section 11BB.

Upon examination, the Tribunal found that the first appellate authority erred in not following the statutory provisions of Section 11BB. Interest on refund is payable from the date of application, and for applications made before 1995, it becomes payable from 26-8-1995 as per the proviso to Section 11BB. The appellant was entitled to interest on the refund from 26-8-1995 till the date of payment. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.

This judgment highlights the importance of adhering to statutory provisions, especially concerning the payment of interest on delayed refunds, as outlined in Section 11BB. It clarifies that interest on refunds is payable from the date of application, regardless of the outcome of initial denials or subsequent appeals.