2007 (6) TMI 385

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... alize him for no fault of his. In my opinion, it is high time that the human face of the administration gets revealed in such queer moments and not the iron clause (if not claws) that may end up harassing the honest tax-payers - appeal of Revenue dismissed.
Dr. T.V. Sairam, J. REPRESENTED BY : Shri S.L. Meena, Authorised Representative, for the Appellant. None, for the Respondent. [Order]. - This is a case filed by the Revenue challenging the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 28-10-2005. An intimation has been received from the respondent's side stating that their corporate office is located at Ludhiana and their advocate is stationed at Delhi. Therefore, adjournment is sought. As no valid ground is forthcoming, the request .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rce in the plea of the respondents that the delay was on the part of the department to sanction the refunds filed by them in terms of Notification No. 56/2002. It was also found that there was nothing on record to suggest that the delay was due to the respondents. Accordingly, it was ordered by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) that no interest was recoverable from the respondents. 3. The learned authorized representative of the department states that as per the provisions of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 and Section 11 of the Central Excise Act, if the assessee fails to pay the amount of duty by the due date, he shall be liable to pay the outstanding amount alongwith interest at the rate of 2% per month or Rs. 1000/- per .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er verification shall refund amount of duty paid during the month under consideration to the manufacturer by the 15th day of the next month. A special framework has thus been devised which has to be by virtue of its uniqueness has to operate slightly away from the normal procedure as envisaged under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules and Section 11 of the Central Excise Act. In my opinion, the whole procedure has to be viewed in proper perspective, transcending from the confines of the norms applicable in the case of normal or general procedure under the law. Due to explicity of the procedure as laid down under the notification the confines of the procedure as applicable generally under Rule 8 and Section 11 need to be interpreted to accomm .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X