9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 1057X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nces of the case. In view of the same, the appellants have not made out any case for grant of interest on the amount refunded.
Conclusion - The refund was processed within the statutory period, and no interest is payable as per the statutory provisions.
Appeal dismissed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o strict compliance of the statutory provisions. The appellants preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) against the OIO cited above. Commissioner (Appeals) vide OIA dated 24.12.2019 rejected the appeal filed by the Department. Hence, this appeal. 3. Shri Akhil Gupta, learned Counsel for the appellant, submits that interest is a financial right as the Department has illegally held the amount of Rs.19,48,553/- paid by the Housing Board; he relies on Sandvik Asia Ltd.- 2008 (8) STR 193 (SC) and submits that interest is in the nature of compensation by a person whose acts or omissions have caused loss or injury to others. He also submits that Tribunal has followed the above decision in the case of Marshall Foundry and Engineering Pvt. Ltd. vide Final Order No.61058-61062/2019 dated November 28, 2019 and in the case of Riba Textile Ltd. vide Final Order No. 60015/2020 dated 1st January, 2020. 4. Learned Counsel further submits that Housing Board has filed refund claim on March 28, 2017 and this fact was not considered by the Department; the application of the Board was returned on 3rd May, 2017; during the proceedings before the Hon'ble High Court in Civil Writ Petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erest is payable; it has been held in the following cases that in case of refunds, statutory provisions have to be followed: * Willowood Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. -2022 (60) GSTL 3 (SC) * Gujarat Fluoro Chemicals -2017 (51) STR 236 (SC) * Cosmo Films Limited -Civil Appeal No. 290 of 2023 * G.S Promoters and Developers -Final Order No.60703/2023 dated 11.12.2023 in Appeal No.60083/2023. 6. Learned Authorized Representative submits that CESTAT being a creature of the Statute is bound by the Statute and cannot go beyond the statutory provisions. He relies on the following cases: * Veer Overseas 2015 (18) GSTL 59 (Tri. LB) * Bochasanwasi Shri Aksharpurushottam Swaminarayan Sanstha 2022 (380) ELT 82 (Tri. Ahmd.) * Kali Aerated Water Works 2023 (383) ELT 413 (Mad.) * Ajay Exports 2016 (335) ELT 150 (Tri. Mumbai) * Maa Mahamaya Industries Ltd. 2014 (310) ELT 244(A.P) 7. Learned Authorized Representative submits that the plea of the appellant that the interest should be granted from the date of deposit does not hold good as it has no statutory backing. He submits that the facts of the cases relied upon by the appellant are different from the impugned case and therefore a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gly, filed a refund application dated June 14, 2019, for Rs.19,48,553, which was granted vide OIO dated July 11, 2019. The appellant claims that they are eligible to interest from the date of payment of service tax. 9. I find that Hon'ble High Court modified the Order dated March 07, 2019, issuing direction as follows. After hearing counsel for the parties, order dated 7.3.2019 is hereby modified to the extent that it will be petitioner-contractor who will file a fresh application claiming refund of service tax collected from him and deposited by the Housing Board with the Tax Authorities within three weeks from today and the same shall be considered by the authorities concerned within next one month and release the admissible/due refund in accordance with law. 10. Further the Hon'ble High Court passed the following final order in the said writ petition as follows. At the time of resumed hearing today, counsel for the petitioner(s) states that an order dated 11.07.2019 has been passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Goods and Service Tax Division, Hisar, whereby the total amount deducted i.e. ₹ 19,48,553/- (in CWP No. 4385 of 2018) by "The HBH" and deposited with the Tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tax Authorities in not adhering to strict compliance of the statutory provisions. I find that Hon'ble High Court did not direct that the appellants be paid interest. At the same time as the refund has been paid within the time frame provided in the statute, payment of interest is not warranted. 13. I find that in this case, the refund has been sanctioned in time. As there is no delay in sanctioning the refund, there are no provisions in the statute to grant interest. Tribunal being a creature of statute cannot travel beyond the provisions of Law or statute. I find that the appellants have cited so many decisions on the issue of payment of interest. However, the facts of all the cases are different as all the cases involve delayed sanction of refund. The instant case is not about the delay in sanction of refund and consequential payment of interest. Therefore, the cases cited are not applicable as the facts and circumstances are different. Hon'ble High court also took cognizance of the peculiar circumstances of the case. In view of the same, I find that the appellants have not made out any case for grant of interest on the amount refunded. 14. in view of the above, appeal is dism ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
