9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 347X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inue to retain the character of interest. This Tribunal Bangalore Bench in the case of G Tech Computer Education (supra) has relied upon the decision of High Court of Kerala in the case of THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS VERSUS M/S. SHREE SIMANDAR ENTERPRISES, [ 2012 (8) TMI 176 - KERALA HIGH COURT] wherein the Hon ble High Court has held that when an appellate authority allows an appeal filed against imposition of tax, duty, fine, penalty, etc., it is the bounden duty of the assessing authority, as part of a democratic Government, to refund the amounts covered by orders of the appellate authority, when appeals are allowed fully or partially. The amount of Rs. 62,12,944/- since was deposited during the investigation of such a proposal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said order that the appellant filed the refund application dated 17.05.2021 seeking refund for an amount of Rs. 62,12,944/- as was deposited vide the challans mentioned below:- Sl.No. Challan No. Date Amount (Rs.) 1. 4591 26.032015 46,39,253/- 2. 04585 26.03.2015 13,54,875/- 3. 04596 26.03.2015 2,18,816/- Total Rs. 62,12,944/- 2. The original adjudicatin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner of CGST, New Delhi vs. EMMAR Mgf. Construction Pvt. Ltd. [2021 (55) G.S.T.L. 311 (Tri.-Del.). Ld. Counsel further impressed upon that once the amount paid towards tax no longer remain amount towards tax liability of assessee, it acquire the character of revenue deposit. The decision in the case of C.C, Cochin v. Shree Simandar Enterprises [2012 (283) E.L.T. 369 (Kerala)] been relied upon. Finally it is submitted that once the demand is set aside the question of bifurcation of deposited amount as interest is no more relevant. Following decisions have been relied upon:- 1. Schenck Roteck India Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Cust., C.Ex ST Noida [2017 (3) G.S.T.L. 452 (Tri.-All.)] 2. G.Tech Computer Education Centre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eposited during the investigation and/or pending litigation is ipso facto an amount of pre-deposit, which is to be refunded to the assessee alongwith the interest as is available to such assessee. The issue stands clarified by the decision of Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Sandvik Asia Ltd. reported as 2006 (196) ELT 257 (S.C.) followed by this Tribunal in the case of Parle Agro Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner, CGST reported as 2021 TIOL 306 (CESTAT-Allahabad). The decision relied upon by the appellant i.e EMMAR MGF Construction Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has also followed the said outcome. Since the entire amount has obtained the character of pre-deposit to my opinion it was highly unjustified on the part of the Commissioner (Appeals) to bifu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rders of the appellate authority, when appeals are allowed fully or partially. 10. In the light of the entire above discussion, I hold that the amount of Rs. 62,12,944/- since was deposited during the investigation of such a proposal which stands finally set aside by this Tribunal, the entire deposited amount was liable to be refunded to the appellant, the entire amount being have acquired the character of pre-deposit as is required to be paid under section 35F of Central Excise Act alongwith interest. In view thereof it is held that Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly granted interest on the amount of Rs. 54,84,578/- however has wrongly rejected the balance claim by bifurcating the amount of Rs. 7,28,366/- as interest. The order to tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
