2016 (6) TMI 612 - AT - Central Excise

Interest on refund - Held that - There is a time gap between the refund received and paying back thereof to the Treasury. Learned Adjudicating Authority is directed to realise interest for the time gap due to availing of public money by the appellant and appropriate notice be issued in that regard upon calculation for recovery. Adjudicating Authority is directed to conduct an enquiry within 15 days of receipt of this order on the basis of material available on record as well as seeking co-operation of the appellant. On the basis of the outcome of the enquiry confronting the result thereof, the Authority shall pass appropriate order. It is expected that the whole process is completed by the end of June, 2016.

Summary

Issues:
1. Refund admissibility and interest calculation
2. Denial of refund on technical objection
3. Conducting an enquiry on refund claim
4. Granting duty draw-back on Customs duty part

Analysis:

Issue 1: Refund admissibility and interest calculation
The appellant decided not to argue on certain issues related to refund, leading to the conclusion that no refund is admissible on those counts. However, a time gap was noted between the refund received by the appellant and the repayment to the Treasury. The Adjudicating Authority was directed to calculate and realize interest for this time gap, emphasizing the importance of timely repayment of public funds. The order specified that apart from interest recovery, no other cause of action remained for the mentioned issues.

Issue 2: Denial of refund on technical objection
The counsel for the appellant argued that the denial of refund was based solely on technical objections. The judgment highlighted that when a refund claim is made, it is the duty of the department to thoroughly examine the claim through a fair enquiry process. The Authority was directed to conduct an enquiry within a specified timeline, considering the material available and seeking cooperation from the appellant. The judgment stressed the importance of serving public interest by conducting a diligent enquiry and resolving objections in a just manner.

Issue 3: Conducting an enquiry on refund claim
In response to the arbitrary application of mind by the Authority regarding the duty draw-back on Customs duty part, the judgment noted the lack of examination on whether the Customs duty part of the invoices should be granted as duty draw-back to the appellant. The issue was remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for scrutiny, with a directive to allow the appellant to explain whether the claim pertained only to the Customs duty part. The Authority was instructed to pass an appropriate order based on the explanation provided by the appellant.

Issue 4: Granting duty draw-back on Customs duty part
Given the direction for an enquiry on another issue, the Authority was tasked with scrutinizing the duty draw-back claim related to the Customs duty part. The appellant was to be given a fair opportunity to present their case and clarify the scope of the claim. The judgment emphasized the necessity of affording the appellant a reasonable opportunity for hearing before a final order was passed, setting a deadline for the completion of the process.

In conclusion, the appeal was allowed based on the specified terms, highlighting the importance of conducting thorough enquiries, granting opportunities for explanation, and ensuring timely and fair resolution of refund claims and duty draw-back issues.