Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2024 (9) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2024 (9) TMI 771 - HC - Central Excise


Issues:
- Grant of interest on delayed refunds under Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
- Interpretation of Circular No. 670/61/2002-CX issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs.
- Application of legal provisions for interest on refunded amounts.
- Compliance with the law by the concerned officer.

Analysis:

The petitioner approached the court aggrieved by the rejection of their request for interest on a refunded amount as per a letter dated 19th January 2024. The refund was granted under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, but no interest was provided under Section 11BB. The petitioner contended that interest should have been automatically granted as per the Act and a circular issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs. The respondent argued that if the petitioner had raised this issue before the original order was passed, interest might have been considered. The court disagreed, emphasizing that the officer should be aware of the law, especially regarding the automatic application of Section 11BB for refunds beyond three months.

The court referred to a judgment in a similar case, Qualcomm India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India, which supported the petitioner's entitlement to interest under Section 11BB. In light of the legal provisions and to avoid burdening officers with additional appeals, the court directed the appropriate officer to calculate and pay the interest at the notified rate within four weeks of the order. The court explicitly stated that the petitioner's excuse for reapplying for interest or submitting the order copy would not be entertained. Failure to comply with the court's directive would be considered willful disobedience.

Ultimately, the petition was disposed of, and the advocate for the respondent was instructed to provide the necessary information to the concerned officer. The judgment highlighted the importance of adhering to legal provisions for interest on delayed refunds and underscored the responsibility of officers to comply with the law without necessitating further appeals.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates