2014 (1) TMI 1112 - AT - Central Excise

Waiver of pre-deposit of Interest Refund of cess and Education cess - Revenue was of the view that self re-credit of cess and education cess was not available Held that - Once the department itself contended that cess and education cess is not duty of excise so as to disentitle an assessee to claim the self- refund - a contra stand cannot be taken by the Revenue - The amount of interest does not stand quantified by the lower authority till date - the application is to be dismissed - the applicant is given liberty to file a fresh application as and when the interest amount is quantified stay application not maintainable Decided in favor of Assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit of interest in refund of Cess and Education Cess.

Analysis:
The appellant sought to dispense with the pre-deposit condition of interest concerning the refund of Cess and Education Cess. The appellant, a unit in Jammu, operated under Notification No. 56/2002-CE, allowing self re-credit of duty paid at the time of goods clearance. Despite paying duty, cess, and education cess, and crediting the same in the PLA account, the Revenue contended that self re-credit of cess and education cess was not permissible. The Adjudicating Authority rejected the refund request, prompting the appellant to debit the cess and education cess within five days of rejection.

Analysis:
The notification in question, specifically para (e) of 2-A, outlines the procedure for reversing excess credit taken by a manufacturer within five days of intimation by the Assistant Commissioner. The appellants successfully reversed the cess and education cess within the stipulated time frame. It was argued that Section 11B, used to determine interest, does not apply as it pertains to delayed excise duty payment, not cess and education cess. The Revenue's stance that cess and education cess are not excise duty to deny self-refund contradicts seeking interest later.

Analysis:
While agreeing with the appellant's argument, the Tribunal noted that the lower authority had not quantified the interest amount. Consequently, the application was dismissed, granting the appellant the liberty to file a fresh application upon quantification of interest. The present stay application was deemed not maintainable, with the option for the appellant to reapply once the interest amount was determined. The Tribunal disposed of the stay petition accordingly, allowing for a potential future application upon quantification.