9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (10) TMI 240X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i.Pramod Kumar, JDR, for Respondents [Order]- 1. This appeal is directed against the order-in-appeal No.NSK/APL/AKD/255/2006 dated 24/11/2006. 2. The issue involved in this case is in a very narrow compass. The issue involved in this case is whether the appellant is eligible for interest on the refund on the amount, which was due to him as a consequential relief by way of order of the Tribunal. The appellant filed a refund claim on 23/06/97 disputing the amount which has been paid by him on the insistence of the Central Excise Officers. The issue was finally settled in favour of the appellants by the order of the Tribunal dated 23/08/2005. Lower authorities allowed the refund claim of Rs.5,91,888/- but did not grant any interest of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant paid the amount on 31/10/96, the very day on which the investigation started. SCN was issued later on 2/6/98 and subsequent proceedings followed as indicated in para 2 above. Obviously, there was no fresh cause of action during the intervening period in favour of the appellant to file a refund claim (para 4 (i) refers) the issue was under investigation followed by process of adjudication. Thus the claim was filed without any valid ground for doing so and it was rightly not entertained as being premature. Since the claim itself was not maintainable at the point of time of its filing, the date of filing of that claim can not be taken as the date of filing of a claim which subsequently arose as a consequence of Hon'ble CESTAT's ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ., (supra). The Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Jayanta Glass Ltd. held as under:- "In view of the above explanation when this Tribunal passed Final Order on 6/12/2001 it would relate back to the date of the order passed under sub-section (2) of Section 11B. In view of the above we are of the view that the applicant is fully justified in contending that interest due to it is to be calculated on the basis of its application filed on 5/2/98. The decision of the Kolkata High Court relied on behalf of the respondent has no application to the present situation. That was a case of refund of pre-deposit. The Hon'ble High Court has held that the liability to pay interest would arise only after decision is taken by the final aut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
