9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 668X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... S PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE GUWAHATI [ 2017 (11) TMI 655 - SUPREME COURT] vide their decision in the case of M/S. UNICORN INDUSTRIES VERSUS UNION OF INDIA OTHERS [ 2019 (12) TMI 286 - SUPREME COURT] . HELD THAT:- It is found that consequent to the passing of judgment by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Unicorn Industries, the Department has raised a number of demands on the refunds already granted to various assessees; Hon ble High Court of Jammu Kashmir in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CGST AND COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, J K, JAMMU VERSUS NARBADA INDUSTRIAL BARI BRAHMANA JAMMU [ 2021 (10) TMI 1426 - JAMMU KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT] , has held that the change of opinion of the Court i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts were rejected by the appellate Commissioner; on an appeal by the appellants this Bench allowed the appeal following the ratio of the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of SRD Nutrients Pvt. Ltd.-2017 (355) ELT 481 (S.C.); consequently, the refunds were granted to the appellants; however, interest on the delayed payment of refund was not considered by the sanctioning authority; on various appeals preferred by the appellants, Commissioner (Appeals) vide a common impugned order dated 15.11.2021 rejected the appellant s request for grant of interest holding that Hon ble Apex Court has decided the matter, pertaining to refund of Education Cess and Secondary and Higher Education Cess, finally in the case of M/s Unicorn Industries-20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... B while relying upon the doctrine of unjust enrichment at the same time; he relies on the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Champion Flavours vide Final Order No. A/60140/2023 dated 29.05.2023. 4. Learned Authorized Representative for the Department reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 5. Heard both sides and perused the records of the case. Brief issues involved in these cases is as to whether the appellants are entitled for interest on the refund sanctioned to them by the Department consequential to the orders passed by the Tribunal following the decision of Hon ble Apex Court in the case of SRD Nutrients (supra). Learned Counsel for the appellants argues that interest is a natural corollary of the refund granted and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the case of Unicorn Industries. If such an action is permitted, it will open a Pandora box and the lis between the parties which had attained finality will never come to an end. This would be against the public policy which envisages providing quietus to litigation at some stage. 7. I find that Hon ble Apex Court has upheld the above decision. I further find that the ratio of the above judgment is equally applicable to the Department and the assessees. Either way, it would amount to opening up of a pandoras box as held by the Hon ble High Court of Jammu, Kashmir Ladakh. If the Department is barred from raising demands for the refunds already granted, the appellants also cannot seek interest on the refunds already granted. I further ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
