9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 407X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efund is arising out of the order of appellate authority. The relevant date for filing refund is within one year from the date of such order therefore, in the present case when refund itself was not arising before the tribunal s order dated 12.01.2018 there is no question of any interest. However, for entertaining the appeal the appellant required to pay 7.5% or 10% as the case may be as pre deposit in terms of section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944. Section 35FF provides for interest on the mandatory pre deposit of 7.5% or 10% as the case may be, paid for filing the appeal. If any assessee pays an amount more than that which is otherwise not required, no interest is accurable on the amount over and above the mandatory pre deposit in te ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944 cannot be considered as deposit under the provisions of Section 35F ibid but concluding the liability towards excise duty, liability of interest arises if the sanctioning authority failed to grant the refund within three months from the date of application. In the instant case, there is no such dispute. Aggrieved by the said order-in-appeal, appellant is before this Tribunal. 3. Ms. Aanchal Kesari, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant submits that Commissioner (Appeals) have erred in facts and law by holding that refund of interest is inadmissible on the deposit amount of ₹ 49,32,934/- made during the investigation and pendency of proceedings. Deposit made during investigation woul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll date of refund of such amount. Reliance placed upon the CBIC Circular No. 984/08/2014-CX dated 16.09.2014 by Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) is wholly misconceived. Respondent have erred in relying upon the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in Ranbaxy Laborites Ltd. Vs Union of India 2011 (273) ELT 3 (S.C.) The core issue covered under the said judgment pertains to the commencement of the period for the purpose of payment of interest on delayed refund of rebate, in terms of Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act 1944. 4. Shri P.K Singh, Learned Superintendent (AR) supported the findings in the impugned orders and submits that in the present case, the refund of amount paid during the investigation become refundable as a consequence of Order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the present case when refund itself was not arising before the tribunal s order dated 12.01.2018 there is no question of any interest. However, for entertaining the appeal the appellant required to pay 7.5% or 10% as the case may be as pre deposit in terms of section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944. Section 35FF provides for interest on the mandatory pre deposit of 7.5% or 10% as the case may be, paid for filing the appeal. If any assessee pays an amount more than that which is otherwise not required, no interest is accurable on the amount over and above the mandatory pre deposit in terms of Section 35FF. Therefore, in my considered view, in the impugned order the demand of interest on refund over and above the mandatory pre deposit was ri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
