9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 373X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as ordered to be reversed by the appellant and got reversed also. The said amounts stand appropriated by the adjudication order - Also for the reason that the amount of credit reversed was the same amount as was proposed to be reversed vide the six show cause notices. This reversal to my opinion amounts to appropriation. Appropriation is the act of setting aside money for a specific purpose. The reversal of this amount by the appellant on his own post issuance of show cause notice proposing the said reversal is therefore nothing but the appropriation of the amount towards duty. The bare perusal of the provision reveals that the liability of interest on delayed refunds vis-à-vis amount of duty arises only when the amount is not refunded within three months from the date of receipt of the application/claim. Since admittedly the refund claim was sanctioned within three months from the date of respective application, the appellant is held not entitled to claim interest on the amount of refund. Though the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case M/s Pricol Ltd [2015 (3) TMI 735 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] has held that a consistent view is being taken by the courts that any amount which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thereby holding appellant eligible for entire amount of credit i.e. respective amounts in each appeal (even the requantified amount). 1.1 Since the order of reversal of Cenvat credit has totally been set aside that the appellant filed the impugned refund claims as mentioned above. However, the original adjudicating authority in respective appeals has sanctioned the refund claims but not awarded the interest. Being aggrieved the appeal was filed before Commissioner (Appeals). Commissioner (Appeals) has sanctioned the refund claims, however, has not passed any order with respect to sanctioning of interest. Being aggrieved the appellant is before this Tribunal. 2. We have heard Shri R.S. Sharma, learned Advocate for the appellant and Shri Rohit Issar, learned Authorized Representative for the respondent. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has mentioned that the final order of this Tribunal dated 06.07.2022 has held appellants entitled to consequential benefits in accordance with law. Hence, the refund claim filed pursuant to said order would have been sanctioned along with the interest as law permits for the amount of interest to be paid along with the amount of refund sanctione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 2019 vide Final Order No. 50590-50591/2022 dated 06.07.2022. (ii) Parle Agro Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax, Noida in Excise Appeal No. 70628, 70674 of 2019 vide Final order No. 70180-70181/2021 dated 25.05.2021 (iii) J.K. Cement Works Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Central Goods and Service Tax, Udaipur in Excise Appeal No. 50479 of 2019 vide Final Order No. 51052/2021 dated 02.03.2021 4. While rebutting these submissions, learned Departmental Representative has mentioned that the amount of wrongly availed Cenvat credit, as alleged, was reversed by the appellant voluntarily after the issuance of the six show cause notices proposing the recovery of the said amount of Cenvat credit. Hence, it is a wrong submission on behalf of the appeallant that the amount in question was deposited at the stage of investigation. Resultantly, the amount in question cannot be called as the amount of revenue deposit. Admittedly, it is not an amount of mandatory pre-deposit in terms of Section 35F of Central Excise Act. It is also mentioned that in all the decisions as relied upon by the appellant, the amount in question was the amount under protest or was an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eversed by the appellant after the issuance of the said show cause notices. Though the appellant has claimed that the deposit was under protest but the department has objected the same alleging that the reversal was made voluntarily by the appellant. Apparently and admittedly, there is no written protest ever raised by the appellant for reversing the said amount of credit. 8. It is also an apparent fact that initially the entire amount was held to have been wrongly availed credit. However, this Tribunal vide final order dated 04.07.2011 has partly allowed the availment of Cenvat credit and ordered reversal of the remaining directing the Commissioner (Appeals) to re-quantifying the amount of reversal of Cenvat credit. In view of those directions, the amount of the eligible Cenvat credit to the appellant was quantified. However, the Cenvat credit of such amount, for which the refund claim was filed was held to be ineligible Cenvat credit and thus was ordered to be reversed by the appellant and got reversed also. The said amounts stand appropriated by the adjudication order. These circumstances makes it apparently clear that the amount of Cenvat credit was reversed after it was propo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ordered to be refunded under sub-section (2) of Section 11-B to any applicant is not refunded within three months from the date of receipt of application under sub-section (1) of that section, there shall be paid to that applicant interest at such rate, 2[not below five per cent and not exceeding thirty per cent per annum as is for the time being fixed 3[by the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette,]] on such duty from the date immediately after the expiry of three months from the date of receipt of such application till the date of refund of such duty: Provided that where any duty ordered to be refunded under sub-section (2) of Section 11-B in respect of an application under sub-section (1) of that section made before the date on which the Finance Bill, 1995 receives the assent of the President, is not refunded within three months from such date, there shall be paid to the applicant interest under this section from the date immediately after three months from such date, till the date of refund of such duty. Explanation.--- Where any order of refund is made by the Commissioner (Appeals), Appellate Tribunal, National Tax Tribunal or any court against an o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
