9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 620X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ould be 6% or 12% p.a. - Held that:- Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Advance Mechanical Works [2004 (12) TMI 107 - CESTAT, MUMBAI], after referring to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court on the subject held that interest is not payable on penalty amount and also on the interest paid subsequent to the Adjudication order. Interest @ 6% on the delayed refund as per the relevant no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 12/- and 25% of penalty amounting to ₹ 78,763/-. Later, they filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). By an order dt.07.06.2005, the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the partly the appeal filed by the Appellant. Consequently, the Appellant became eligible to refund of Service Tax of ₹ 2,98,227/- interest of ₹ 2,03,472/- and penalty of ₹ 78,763/- paid earlie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d pursuant to the OIO and whether the rate of interest would be 6% or 12% p.a. It is his contention that the rate of interest @ 6% was allowed on the delayed refund in view of Notification No.67/2003-CE(NT), dt.12.09.2003, issued under Section 11BB of Central Excise Act, 1944. Further, he has submitted that no interest is payable on the penalty and the interest amount paid by the Appellant, in v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upreme Court in the case of M/s ITC Ltd, has held that interest @ 6% on the delayed refund as per the relevant notification would only be admissible. In view of the above judgments, we do not find any merit in the appeal. Accordingly, the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) is upheld and the appeal is dismissed. (Operative part of the order pronounced in the open court) - - TaxTM ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
