9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 300X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e entitled to interest - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal(s) Involved: ST/21662/2017-SM, ST/21663/2017-SM - Final Order No, 20300-20301 / 2018 - Dated:- 21-2-2018 - MR. S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Ms. Isha Sharma, Advocate, For the Appellant Snit, Kavitha Podwal, Superintendent(AR), For the Respondent Per: S.S GARG Appellants have filed these two appeals against the common impugned order dt. 31/08/2017 passed by the Commissioner(Appeals) whereby the Commissioner(Appeals) has set aside both the Orders-in-Original dt. 21/06/2017 to the limited extent of disallowance of refund in the said Orders-in-Original by way of remand for fresh adjudication by giving certain directions. For the sake of con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reason. He further submitted that the impugned order has not given any reason as to why interest is not eligible on refund sanctioned. He also submitted that in the appeal filed before the Commissioner(Appeals) specific prayer and request was made by the appellant to allow the refund claim in its entirety along with applicable interest. Further the Commissioner(Appeals) has not given any observation on this specific prayer with regard to granting of interest on the refund sanctioned. Learned counsel also produced grounds of appeal filed before the Commissioner(Appeals) wherein the appellants have taken the specific plea that they are entitled to interest on the sanctioned refund but the Commissioner (Appeals) has not given any finding on th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ence the duty payable on the ultimately manufactured goods/services rendered stands reduced to the extent of duty a/ready paid on the inputs. Thus the duty paid on inputs by the supplier has already been actually received by the exchequer. Therefore, this contention is to say the least, misconceived. 4.3. He also submitted that Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Annapurna Pvt. Ltd. [2004(167) ELT 529 (Tri. Mum.)] has held that Section 11B covers both refund of duty as well as refund of CENVAT credit and accordingly the provision of Section 11BB are applicable even for grant of refund of CENVAT credit Further the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. vs. UOI [201 1(273) ELT 3 (SC)] has upheld grant of interest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
