2018 (6) TMI 638 - AT - Central Excise

Refund claim - time limitation - whether the observation of the Commissioner (Appeals) that the refund claim is not barred by limitation for the period November 2007 to April 2008 is correct or not? - Held that - It is settled decision of law that the relevant date is the date of initial filing of the refund claim and not the resubmission of the same - the refund claim for the period November 2007 to April 2008 is not hit by time-bar. Interest on delayed refund - whether the assessee is entitled to interest on the refund that is already sanctioned to him? - Held that - The refund claim having been filed on 5.12.2008 and resubmitted on 26.3.2010, the assessee would be eligible for interest on the delay of refund from three months from the date of initial submission of the refund claim. The refund was sanctioned on 11.6.2013 and the assessee would be eligible for interest on the delayed refund three months after the date of filing of the resubmitted refund claim which is 26.3.2010 - since department were not able to process the claim unless the assessee resubmitted the claim, Department cannot be burdened to pay interest from 5.12.2018 to 26.3.2010. Unjust enrichment - Held that - The assessee has produced Chartered Accountant s certificate along with necessary documents. The same has been verified by the refund sanctioning authority and has sanctioned the refund - appeal allowed. Appeal allowed in part.

Issues involved:
1. Refund claim rejection on grounds of being time-barred.
2. Eligibility for interest on delayed refund.
3. Reliability of Chartered Accountant's certificate.
4. Rejection of balance refund claim amount.
5. Finality of the rejected refund claim amount.

Issue 1: Refund claim time-bar rejection
The assessee filed a refund claim for a specific period, which was initially rejected as time-barred. The Commissioner (Appeals) later held that the claim was not time-barred for a certain period and directed the adjudicating authority to grant the refund based on a Chartered Accountant's certificate and supporting documents. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision, stating that the relevant date for considering time-bar is the initial filing date, not the resubmission date.

Issue 2: Eligibility for interest on delayed refund
Regarding interest on the delayed refund, the Tribunal determined that the assessee would be eligible for interest three months after the resubmission of the refund claim, not from the initial filing date. The Tribunal noted that the department could not be burdened to pay interest from the filing date to the resubmission date due to processing delays caused by the need for resubmission.

Issue 3: Reliability of Chartered Accountant's certificate
The Tribunal found that the Chartered Accountant's certificate and supporting documents provided by the assessee were sufficient to establish that the duty burden was not passed on to others. As a result, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision to grant the refund based on the Chartered Accountant's certificate.

Issue 4: Rejection of balance refund claim amount
The original authority rejected a portion of the balance refund claim due to the assessee's failure to provide necessary documents. The Tribunal upheld this rejection, stating that the assessee did not submit evidence for the rejected amount, and the issue had already been finalized in previous proceedings.

Issue 5: Finality of rejected refund claim amount
The Tribunal clarified that the rejection of a specific refund claim amount had already been finalized in previous proceedings, and the assessee's appeal was allowed only for the grant of interest on the sanctioned refund amount within a specified period. The department's appeal was dismissed, and the cross-objection was disposed of accordingly.

This comprehensive analysis of the judgment addresses all the issues involved and provides a detailed overview of the Tribunal's decision on each matter.

← Previous Next →