2008 (7) TMI 248 - AT - Central Excise

Delayed refund Interest appellant is entitled to interest starting from expiry of three months period from date of passing of order by Tribunal till date of actual refund - As regards the interest on the penalty amount, deposited by the appellant by way of adjustment against rebate claims, we hold that no differentiation can be made in duty and penalty for the purpose of interest

Summary

Issues:
1. Claim of interest on refunded amounts.
2. Adjustment of sanctioned rebate claims against confirmed dues.
3. Entitlement to interest on penalty amount.

Analysis:
1. The appellant's factory was visited by Central Excise officers, resulting in an offence case and adjudication proceedings. The Commissioner confirmed duty and penalties, which were set aside by the Tribunal and remanded for de novo adjudication. The Commissioner, in remand proceedings, confirmed duty and imposed penalties. The Tribunal dispensed with pre-deposit of duty and penalties due to the appellant's financial condition. The Deputy Commissioner later sanctioned rebate claims, adjusting them against confirmed dues. The Tribunal then set aside the duty amount and reduced the penalty, entitling the appellant to a refund. The appellant filed for a refund, which was granted after some time. The dispute arose regarding the interest on the refunded amounts, with the lower authorities granting interest only from the date of application to the date of refund.

2. The appellant argued that the Department was unjustified in adjusting rebate claims against the dues, as the duty and penalty confirmation was not final due to the pending appeal. Citing relevant decisions, the appellant claimed interest from the date of adjustment of dues against rebate claims, as the rebates were not refunded within three months. However, the Tribunal found that the stay order did not grant a stay of recovery to the appellant, allowing the Commissioner to recover the amounts. The Tribunal held that interest should start from the expiry of three months from the date of the Tribunal's order setting aside the duty and reducing the penalty.

3. Regarding interest on the penalty amount deposited by the appellant, the Tribunal held that no differentiation should be made between duty and penalty for interest purposes. The deposits were considered interim and subject to refund with interest upon the success of the appeal. The Tribunal emphasized that interest is linked to the principal amount and ordered the original Adjudicating Authority to calculate interest on the refunded amounts. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.