9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 87X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant had deposited Anti Dumping Duty(ADD) amounting to Rs. 1,45,00,000/-. 2.2 On completion of investigations/ enquiries, a show cause notice no. 29/2015 dated 29.5.2015 was issued to the appellant. Principal Commissioner Noida Customs vide OIO No. 03/Pr. Commr./Noida-Cus./2017 dated 28.02.2017 confirmed the full demand of Rs. 7,38,54,123/- towards anti-dumping duty along with interest and imposed equivalent penalty on the appellant under Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962. Further, penalty of Rs. 1 crore was also imposed on the appellant company under Section 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. Personal penalty of Rs. 1 crore was also imposed on Shri Vishal Gupta, Director under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 and further penalty of Rs. 50 Lakhs under Section 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. 2.3 The order in original was set-aside by CESTAT, Allahabad vide Final Order No. 71124-71125/2019 dated 18.06.2019. 2.4 Appellant filed a refund claim of Rs. 1,45,00,000/- being the ADD deposited by them during the course of investigation. The said refund claim was disposed of by the Deputy Commissioner, Noida Customs Commissionerate vide Memorandum Order No. 92/Refund/Noida Cu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s recorded in the impugned order. 4.1 I have considered the impugned order along with the submissions made in appeal and during the course of argument. 4.2 Impugned order records following findings in respect of the issue on hand: "8. The appellant, in his appeal petition, claimed interest from the date of deposit of the said amount. However, I find that there is no provision under Customs Act 1962 to call an amount paid during investigations as 'Deposit'. Amount so paid is towards probable 'Duty' liability only and in adjudication order, same is appropriated as duty only, Moreover, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of CIT, Gujarat vs. Gujarat Fluoro Chemicals, reported in [2013 (296) E.L.T. 433 (S.C.)] has held that - "Refund - Interest on delayed refund only when statute provides - It is only_ interest provided under statute which can be claimed by assessee from Revenue and no other interest on such statutory interest Therefore, appellant's claim for interest from the date of deposit is not entertainable. However, in case said amount requires to be refunded after adjudication, provisions of Section 27 of the Customs Act 1962 would be appl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en alos the interest provisions as provided by Section 129EE of the Customs Act, 1962 as it existed on the dated of deposit shall be applicable. Section 129EE prior to its substitution by Finance Act (No 2) 2014 with effect from 06.08.2014 read as follows: "129EE Interest on delayed refund of amount deposited under the proviso to Section 129E Where an amount deposited by the appellant in pursuance of an order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as appellate authority), under the first proviso to Section 129 E, is required to be refunded consequent upon the order of the appellate authority and such amount is not refunded within three months from the date of communication of such order to the adjudicating authority, unless the operation of the order of the appellate authority is stayed by a superior court or tribunal, there shall be paid to the appellant interest at the rate specified in section 27A after the expiry of three months from the date of communication of the order of the appellate authority, till the date of refund of such amount." Further proviso to the section 129EE as inserted with effect from 06.08.2014, specif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le. 4.6 I have considered all the arguments further advanced by the appellant and the decisions relied upon by the appellant, in the case of Jindal Pipes Ltd. [Final Order No 70535/2024 dated 08.04.2024 in Excise Appeal No.70403 of 2020] and have observed as follows: 4.3 Appellant has filed this appeal assailing the above order and have claimed the refund from the date of deposit and at rate of 12%. They have claimed the same on the basis of decision of Cahndigarh bench in case of Riba Textiles Ltd [Final Order No 60115/2020 dated 17.01.2020] "6. On going through the decision cited by learned A.R. in the case of M/s Juhu Beach Resort Ltd (supra), I find that in the said case, the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sandvik Asia Ltd 3 Excise Appeal No. 60446 of 2018 vs. CIT, Pune - 2007 (8) STR 193 (SC) and the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CCE, Chennai-II vs. UCAL Fuel Systems Ltd - 2014 (306) ELT 26 (Mad.) have not been considered. Therefore, the said decision cannot be relied upon. As in the case of M/s Marshall Foundry & Engg. Pvt. Ltd. (supra), this Tribunal has examined all said decisions and thereafter observed as under: "8. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellate authority, till the date of refund of such amount." 17. On-going through the provisions of both Income Tax Act, 1961 and Central Excise Act, 1944, the interest on delayed refund is payable after expiry of 3 months from the date of granting refund or from the date of communication of order of the appellate authority, which are parimateria. Therefore, the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sandvik Asia Ltd. (supra) is law of land, in terms of Article 14 of the Constitution of India which is to be followed by me, wherein the Hon'ble Apex has observed as under:- "45. The facts and the law referred to in paragraph (supra) would clearly go to show that the appellant was undisputably entitled to interest under Sections 214 and 244 of the Act as held by the various High Courts and also of this Court. In the instant case, the appellant's money had been unjustifiably withheld by the Department for 17 years without any rhyme or reason. The interest was paid only at the instance and the intervention of this Court in Civil Appeal No. 1887 of 1992 dated 30.04.1997. Interest on delayed payment of refund was not paid to the appellant on 27.03.1981 and 30.04.1986 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ken or for an injury done to another; the giving back an equivalent in either money which is but the measure of value, or in actual value otherwise conferred; a recompense in value; a recompense given for a thing received recompense for the whole injury suffered; 6 Excise Appeal No. 60446 of 2018 remuneration or satisfaction for injury or damage of every description; remuneration for loss of time, necessary expenditures, and for permanent disability if such be the result; remuneration for the injury directly and proximately caused by a breach of contract or duty; remuneration or wages given to an employee or officer." 47. There cannot be any doubt that the award of interest on the refunded amount is as per the statute provisions of law as it then stood and on the peculiar facts and circumstances of each case. When a specific provision has been made under the statute, such provision has to govern the field. Therefore, the Court has to take all relevant factors into consideration while awarding the rate of interest on the compensation. 48. This is the fit and proper case in which action should be initiated against all the officers concerned who were all in charge of this case at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ex Court confined the interest to 12% and further held that any judgment/decision of any High Court taking contrary view, will be no longer good law. The said judgment is rendered, in my considered opinion under similar circumstances. So also in Kuil Fire Works Industries v. Collector of Central of Excise [1997 (95) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.), the pre-deposit made by the assessee was directed to be returned to him with 12% interest. I have also come across the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in Madura Coats Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of C. Ex., Kolkata-IV [2012 (285) E.L.T. 188 (Cal.), wherein the peremptory directions of the Apex Court in the judgment of ITC Ltd. (supra) was considered and ordered 12% interest, and further held that when the High Court directed the respondents to pay interest to the appellant in terms of the circular dated 8-12-2004 on the pre-deposit of the delayed refund within two months, it has to be construed that, the Court meant the rate of interest which was awarded by the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise v. ITC Ltd., which was the rate quantified by the Supreme Court in the absence of any statutory provisions in the Act in question ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed @ 12%. Accordingly, original adjudicating authority is directed to workout the differential interest amount and make the payment to the appellants." 21. As the provisions of section 243 Income Tax Act, 1961 and section 35FF of Central Excise Act, 1944, are parimateria. Therefore, following the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sandvik Asia Ltd. (supra) and Sony Pictures Networks India Pvt.Ltd. (supra) I hold that the appellants are entitled to claim interest from the date of payment of initial amount till the date its refund @ 12% per annum." 7. As this Tribunal has examined the issue in details in the case of M/s Marshall Foundry & Engg. Pvt. Ltd. (supra), therefore, I hold that the appellant is entitled to claim the interest on delay refund from the date of deposit till its realization." 4.4 Further decisions in following decisions have been brought to my knowledge where in following has been observed: A. Parle Agro Pvt Ltd. [2022 (380) ELT 219 (T-ALL)] "28. Section 11B of the Excise Act deals with claim for refund of duty and interest, if any, paid on such duty. It provides that any person claiming refund of any duty of excise and interest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f interest at fifteen per cent per annum for the purpose of the said section. 2. This notification shall come into force from the 1st day of April, 2016. 36. The Notification issued under Section 11BB provides interest at the rate of six per cent per annum. It is reproduced below : Notification No. 67/2003-C.E. (N.T.), dated 12-9-2003 Notification Under Section 11BB Interest @ 6% per annum on delayed refunds. - In exercise of the powers conferred by section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944) and in supersession of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) No. 17/2002-Central Excise (N.T.), dated the 13th May, 2002 [GSR 353(E), dated the 13th May, 2002], except as respect things done or omitted to be done before such supersession, the Central Government hereby fixes the rate of interest at six per cent per annum for the purpose of the said section. 37. The Notification issued under Section 11DD provides interest @ of 15% per annum on the amount collected in excess of duty. It is reproduced below : M.F. (D.R.) Notification No. 68/2003-C.E. (N.T.), dated 12-9-2003 Notification Under Secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned in the said provision. Hon'ble Apex Court also has settled this issue in the case of Sandvik Asia Ltd. reported as 2006 (196) E.L.T. 257 (S.C.) holding the assessee entitled for interest along with the refund of the amount which he was not liable to pay to the Department. 8. I also endorse the following findings of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Parle Agro Pvt. Ltd. reported as 2021-TIOL-306-CESTAT-ALL = 2022 (380) E.L.T. 219 (Tri. - All.) as under : "30. ..... 31. Section 11D of the Excise Act deals with duties of excise collected from the buyer to be deposited with Central Government. It provides that every person who is liable to pay duty and has collected any amount in excess of the duty assessed from the buyer of such goods in any manner as representing duty of excise, shall forthwith pay the amount so collected to the credit of the Central Government. 32. Section 11DD of the Excise Act deals with interest on the amount collected in excess of the duty. It provides that where an amount has been collected in excess of the duty from the buyer of such goods, the person who is liable to pay such amount shall, in addition to the amount, be liable to pay interest at suc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the working capacity of the Writ Petitioners thereby reducing their ability to conduct business and as such appropriate compensation ought to be awarded along with interest for delay. The submissions were opposed by the Learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue. 6. The High Court considered the rival submissions in light of the statutory provisions and relied upon certain decisions including the decision of this Court in K.T. Plantation Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. v. State of Karnataka [(2011) 9 SCC 1], Sandvik Asia Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Pune and Others [(2006) 2 SCC 508 = 2007 (8) S.T.R. 193 (S.C.) = 2006 (196) E.L.T. 257 (S.C.)] and Commissioner of Income Tax, Gujarat v. Gujarat Fluoro Chemicals [(2014) 1 SCC 126 = 2017 (51) S.T.R. 236 (S.C.) = 2013 (296) E.L.T. 433 (S.C.)]. In its judgment dated 10-7-2019 which is under challenge in the second case, the High Court concluded : "22. The position of law appears to be well settled. The provisions relating to an interest of delated payment of refund have been consistently held as beneficial and non-discriminatory. It is true that in the taxing statute the principles of equity may have little role to play, but at the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... directed the respondent authority to pay simple interest on the delayed payment at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the GSTR-3B. 5. It is respectfully submitted that as per section 56 of the IGST Net Interest at the rate of not exceeding six percent may be given whereas by order dated 10-7-2011 this Hon'ble Court was pleased to give interest at the rate of 9%." By separate orders dated 13-3-2020 passed in both the cases, the Review Petitions preferred by the appellant were dismissed. 9. The aforestated judgments and orders passed by the High Court are under challenge in these appeals. The appellants do not dispute the eligibility of the respondents for receiving interest for delayed payment of claims but their submission is that in terms of the relevant statutory provision, the interest could be awarded at the rate of 6 per cent and not 9 per cent per annum. Considering the stand taken by the appellants, at the interim stage, this Court directed the appellants to make good payment of interest at the rate of 6 per cent. Accordingly, the amounts representing interest at that rate have since then been made over. 13. The instant cases have not arisen fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... purpose of merely ordering a refund of money to the return of which the petitioner claims a right." 7. The Court has emphasised that there was no legal right in the appellant who had filed the writ petition to claim the refund under the relevant statute. 8. In the present case also till the insertion of Section 27A in the Act by Act 22 of 1995 there was no right entitling payment of interest on delayed refund under the Act. Such a right was conferred for the first time by the said provision. Act 22 of 1995 also inserted Section 28AA which provides for payment of interest on delayed payment of duty by a person who is liable to pay the duty. Thus at the relevant time there was no statutory right entitling the respondents to payment of interest on delayed refund and the writ petition filed by them was not for the enforcement of a legal right available to them under any statute. The claim for interest was in the nature of compensation for wrongful retention by the appellants of money that was collected from the respondents by way of customs duty, redemption fine and penalty. In view of the law laid down by this Court in Suganmal [AIR 1965 SC 1740: 56 ITR 84: 16 STC 398] a wri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... But an order for payment of money may be made in a writ proceeding, in enforcement of statutory functions of the State or its officers. (Vide Burmah Construction Co. v. State of Orissa [AIR 1962 SC 1320 : 1962 Supp (1) SCR 242]). (ii) If a right has been infringed - whether a fundamental right or a statutory right - and the aggrieved party comes to the Court for enforcement of the right, it will not be giving complete relief if the Court merely declares the existence of such right or the fact that existing right has been infringed. The High Court, while enforcing fundamental or statutory rights, has the power to give consequential relief by ordering payment of money realised by the Government without the authority of law. (Vide State of M.P. v. Bhailal Bhai [AIR 1964 SC 1006]). (iii) A petition for issue of writ of mandamus will not normally be entertained for the purpose of merely ordering a refund of money, to the return of which the petitioner claims a right. The aggrieved party seeking refund has to approach the civil court for claiming the amount, though the High Courts have the power to pass appropriate orders in the exercise of the power conferred under Article 226 for p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e by way of refund : (A) In Modi Industries Ltd. and Another v. Commissioner of Income Tax and Another [(1995) 6 SCC 396] a Bench of three Judges of this Court was called upon to consider the effect of Section 214 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the questions which arose were set out as under : "We shall now indicate how the controversy relating to the meaning of the expression "regular assessment" arises: an assessee pays advance tax according to his estimate of his income during the financial year relevant to the particular assessment year. He then files a return and an assessment is made under Section 143. It is found that he has paid more amount by way of advance tax than the amount of tax assessed. He will be refunded the extra amount with interest calculated from the first day of April of that assessment year to the date of assessment. No difficulty arises in such a case. The difficulty arises in the following situation: indeed it is one of the many situations - not satisfied with the order of assessment, the assessee files an appeal. The appeal is allowed as a consequence of which, the assessment order is revised. As a result of such revised assessment made pursuant to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (B) In Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd., a Bench of two Judges of this Court considered the question whether interest on the compensation amount at the rate of 9 per cent per annum could be awarded when the terms of Section 6 of the Maharashtra Agriculture Lands (Ceiling of Holdings) Act, 1961 prescribed payment of interest only at the rate of 3 per cent per annum. The discussion on the point was : "9. There is considerable force in the submissions of Ms. Madhavi Divan, the Learned Counsel for the respondents that the decisions of the Bombay High Court in Krishnakumar [W.P. No. 83 of 1986, decided on 29-6-1991 (Bom.)] and Changdeo [ W.P. No. 3805 of 2000, decided on 7-7-2000 (Bom.)] are not sound, as they completely ignore Section 26 of the Act, while awarding interest at 9% per annum on the belated payment of compensation. 10. The question as to when and in what circumstances, interest could be awarded on belated payment of compensation, was considered by this Court in Union of India v. Parmal Singh [(2009) 1 SCC 618]. This Court first referred to the general principle and then the exceptions thereto, as under : (SCC pp. 624-25, paras 12-13) "12. When a property is acquired, and l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y in another. (3) Where the amount of compensation or any part thereof, cannot be paid in the aforesaid denomination, it may be paid in cash." (Emphasis supplied) The said section contemplates the payment of compensation with interest at 3% per annum in annual instalments spread over a period of 20 years or at the end of 20 years. It also contemplates payment being made either by transferable bonds or in cash. Sub-section (3) of Section 26 enabling payment of compensation by cash, in cases where it could not be paid by such bonds, does not disturb the rate of interest, which is 3% per annum for 20 years, provided in sub-section (1) thereof. We are therefore of the view that whether the payment is made by transferable bonds or by cash, the rate of interest can be only at 3% per annum for a period of 20 years from the date of taking possession. 12. The next question that requires consideration is about the rate of interest if the payment is not made even after 20 years, and whether it should be only at the rate of 3% per annum, even after 20 years. Section 26 is silent about the rate of interest payable, if the compensation is not paid within 20 years. We are therefore of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were brought to its notice and also referred to the relevant provisions of the Act which provide for refunds to be made by the Revenue when a superior forum directs refund of certain amounts to an assessee while disposing of an appeal, revision, etc. Since there was an inordinate delay on the part of the Revenue in refunding the amount due to the assessee this Court had thought it fit that the assessee should be properly and adequately compensated and therefore in para 51 of the judgment, the Court while compensating the assessee had directed the Revenue to pay a compensation by way of interest for two periods, namely, for Assessment Years 1977-1978, 1978-1979, 1981-1982, 1982-1983 in a sum of Rs. 40,84,906 and interest @ 9% from 31-3-1986 to 27-3-1998 and in default, to pay the penal interest @ 15% per annum for the aforesaid period. 5. In our considered view, the aforesaid judgment has been misquoted and misinterpreted by the assessees and also by the Revenue. They are of the view that in Sandvik case [Sandvik Asia Ltd. v. CIT, (2006) 2 SCC 508] this Court had directed the Revenue to pay interest on the statutory interest in case of delay in the payment. In other words, the int ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 14 or 19 of the Constitution. (d) There is no repugnancy between the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the Rocrich and Devika Rani Rocrich Estate (Acquisition & Transfer) Act, 1996 (in short "the Acquisition Act"), and hence no assent of the President is warranted under Article 254(2) of the Constitution. (e) Public purpose is a precondition for deprivation of a person from his property under Article 300A and the right to claim compensation is also inbuilt in that article and when a person is deprived of his property the State has to justify both the grounds which may depend on scheme of the statute, legislative policy, object and purpose of the legislature and other related factors. (f) Statute, depriving a person of his property is, therefore, amenable to judicial review on grounds hereinbefore discussed." The aforestated answers and especially one at serial (e) show the context in which the issue of compensation was considered by this Court, which is completely distinct and different from the issue with which we are presently concerned. 18. Coming back to the present cases, the relevant provision has prescribed rate of interest at 6 per cent where the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gned order clearly observes that the amount that was deposited by the appellant at the time of visit of officers to their premises was appropriated by the original authority while adjudicating the case of shortages against the appellant. The amount so appropriated acquired the character of duty, the moment it is appropriated against the demand made. In case of Mafatlal Industries [1997 (89) ELT 247 (SC)], Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as follows: "68. Re. : (I) : Hereinbefore, we have referred to the provisions relating to refund obtaining from time to time under the Central Excises and Salt Act. Whether it is Rule 11 (as it stood from time to time) or Section 11B (as it obtained before 1991 or subsequent thereto), they invariably purported to be exhaustive on the question of refund. Rule 11, as in force prior to August 6, 1977, stated that "no duties and charges which have been paid or have been adjusted....shall be refunded unless the claimant makes an application for such refund under his signature and lodges it to the proper officers within three months from the date of such payment or adjustment, as the case may be". Rule 11, as in force between August 6, 1977 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f this Court in Kamala Mills, it must be held that Section 11B [both before and after amendment] is valid and constitutional. In Kamala Mills, this Court upheld the constitutional validity of Section 20 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act (set out hereinbefore) on the ground that the Bombay Act contained adequate provisions for refund, for appeal, revision, rectification of mistake and for condonation of delay in filing appeal/revision. The Court pointed out that had the Bombay Act not provided these remedies and yet barred the resort to civil court, the constitutionality of Section 20 may have been in serious doubt, but since it does provide such remedies, its validity was beyond challenge. To repeat - and it is necessary to do so - so long as Section 11B is constitutionally valid, it has to be followed and given effect to. We can see no reason on which the constitutionality of the said provision - or a similar provision - can be doubted. It must also be remembered that Central Excises and Salt Act is a special enactment creating new and special obligations and rights, which at the same time prescribes the procedure for levy, assessment, collection, refund and all other incidental an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f tax/duty is claimed on the ground that it has been collected from the petitioner/plaintiff - whether before the commencement of the Central Excises and Customs Laws (Amendment) Act, 1991 or thereafter - by mis-interpreting or mis-applying the provisions of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 read with Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 or Customs Act, 1962 read with Customs Tariff Act or by mis-interpreting or mis-applying any of the rules, regulations or notifications issued under the said enactments, such a claim has necessarily to be preferred under and in accordance with the provisions of the respective enactment before the authorities specified thereunder and within the period of limitation prescribed therein. No suit is maintainable in that behalf. While the jurisdiction of the High Courts under Article 226 - and of this Court under Article 32 - cannot be circumscribed by the provisions of the said enactments, they will certainly have due regard to the legislative intent evidenced by the provisions of the said Acts and would exercise their jurisdiction consistent with the provisions of the Act. The writ petition will be considered and disposed of in the light of and in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay furnish to establish that the amount of duty of excise and interest, if any, paid on such duty in relation to which such refund is claimed was collected from, or paid by, him and the incidence of such duty and interest, if any, paid on such duty had not been passed on by him to any other person: Provided ... Provided further that the limitation of two years shall not apply where any duty and interest, if any, paid on such duty has been paid under protest. (2) If, on receipt of any such application, the Assistant Commissioner of Central Exciseor Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise is satisfied that the whole or any part of the duty of excise and interest, if any, paid on such duty paid by the applicant is refundable, he may make an order accordingly and the amount so determined shall be credited to the Fund: Provided that the amount of duty of excise and interest, if any, paid on such duty as determined by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise under the foregoing provisions of this sub-section shall, instead of being credited to the Fund, be paid to the applicant, if such amount is relatable to- (a) rebate of duty of exc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an exemption notification. The petitioner asserts that during the pendency of those proceedings, it was also forced to deposit an amount of Rs. 20,00,000. The SCNs were ultimately finalized in terms of the order in original dated 08 February 2008. 4. In terms of the aforesaid order, the Additional Commissioner confirmed the duty demand of Rs. 45,31,574 /- under Section 11A of the 1944 Act and held the petitioners liable to pay the same along with interest thereon in accordance with Section 11AB of the 1944 Act. Further directions were framed for confiscation of cash amounting to Rs. 44,96,000/- and the imposition of monetary penalties amounting to Rs. 45,31,574/-. The amount of Rs. 20,00,000/- which had been deposited by the petitioners during the pendency of the SCN proceedings was also appropriated against the demands which stood crystallized. 5. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner preferred an appeal. That appeal came to be allowed in toto by the Appellate Authority in terms of its judgment dated 31 December 2008. The Department is stated to have preferred an appeal against that decision before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal5 which ultima ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y is in dispute, in pursuance of the decision or order appealed against: Provided that the amount required to be deposited under this section shall not exceed Rupees Ten crores: Provided further that the provisions of this section shall not apply to the stay applications and appeals pending before any appellate authority prior to the commencement of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2014. Explanation.-For the purposes of this section "duty demanded" shall include,- (i) amount determined under Section 11-D; (ii) amount of erroneous CENVAT credit taken; (iii) amount payable under Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2001 or the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002 or the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.]" "Section 35-FF. Interest on delayed refund of amount deposited under Section 35-F.-Where an amount deposited by the appellant under Section 35-F is required to be refunded consequent upon the order of the appellate authority, there shall be paid to the appellant interest at such rate, not below five per cent and not exceeding thirty-six per cent per annum as is for the time being fixed by the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, on such amount from the date of payment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e in compliance with a statutory pre-condition for the preferment of an appeal cannot be viewed as "duty". It is the aforesaid aspect which appears to have weighed with the Board in proceeding to formulate its directive for refunds being effected immediately upon an appeal coming to be decided in favour of the assessee and not being made dependent upon any application being made in respect thereof. 27. The aforesaid position stands further fortified when one reads Section 35FF of the 1944 Act. As would be evident from a reading of that provision, Section 35FF as distinct from Section 11B does not require the making of a formal application by the assessee. In fact and contrary to Section 11B, the said provision uses the expression "....there shall be paid to the appellant interest.....". Thus, the language of Section 35FF is an embodiment of the manifest obligation of the respondents to refund the pre-deposit consequent to an order passed by the Appellate Authority notwithstanding an application having not been made by the depositor. 28. The distinction between Sections 11B and 35FF is also evident when one bears in mind the language employed in the latter and which stipula ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is that in the present case, the issue of refund is duly regulated by two statutory provisions whose prescriptions would necessarily have to be adhered to. However, for reasons aforenoted we find ourselves unable to endorse the observation appearing in Para 34 of the report where a deposit of duty and a pre deposit were considered to be identical concepts. As was noted hereinbefore, a pre-deposit made as a condition of filing an appeal is in any case not considered to be "duty" even by the respondents. 32. The decision of this Court in Team HR Services, had frowned upon the distinction sought to be advocated by the respondents there between a deposit made under protest and a pre-deposit made in connection with an appeal. As would be further evident from a reading of Paras 14 and 15 the counsel appearing for the respondents had also failed to draw the attention of the Court to any statutory provision which governed the issue of refund. The aforesaid decision is thus clearly distinguishable especially when undisputedly, in the present matters the issue of refund is governed by the provisions of Sections 11B and 11BB." 4.7 In view of discussions as above I do not find any merits in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
