9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 618X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CEAT [2015 (2) TMI 794 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] - The appellant admittedly paid the amount as interest and if it is not payable, the same is refundable, even if not u/s 11B otherwise also as the said amount which is not payable cannot be retained by the Government without authority of law. Time limitation - Held that: - the refund has arisen only after finalisation of the assessment and the appellant have admittedly filed the refund claim within one year from the date of finalisation. Therefore, it is clearly not time barred. Unjust enrichment - Held that: - the lower authorities have not examined the issue of unjust enrichment. Therefore, the matter needs to be remanded only for the verification of aspect of unjust enrichment. Appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amount, which is paid in excess, the refund has to be given by the department. As regards the time bar, he submits that the refund claim was filed within three months from the finalisation of the assessment, which is well within the time. Since the assessment was provisional, refund before finalisation was not matured. Therefore, the contention that the refund should have been filed within one year from the date of payment of interest is not correct. In support of his submission, he placed reliance on the following judgements: a) Northern Minerals Ltd. 2007 (216) ELT 198 (P H) b) Garden Silk Mills Ltd. 1993 (68) ELT 638 (Tri) c) Mehta Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. 2005 (180) ELT 26 (Tri-Mum) d) T D Galiakot Pvt Ltd. 200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th the sides. From the facts I find that the appellants have paid interest in respect of duty paid before the finalisation of the assessment. In case duty paid before the finalisation of the assessment, interest is not chargeable as held by the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of CEAT 2015 (317) ELT 192, which was affirmed by the Hon ble Supreme Court vide order dated 14/12/2015. Therefore, the amount of interest paid by the appellant is refundable. I am not impressed by the reasoning given by the lower authorities that amount paid by the appellant, since it is not payable as interest, the same is an amount paid by the appellant and the refund under 11B is not applicable on any amount, which is other than duty or interest. The appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
