2013 (6) TMI 802 - HC - Central Excise

Court rules in favor of manufacturer in excise duty refund dispute, grants interest on excess duty refund

The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, a manufacturer of excisable goods, in a dispute over the grant of interest on a refund of excess duty paid. ... - Issues involved:The issues involved in this case include the calculation and grant of interest on the amount applied by the petitioner, the denial of interest on the refund amount, and the consideration of supporting documents to prove unjust enrichment.Calculation and Grant of Interest:The petitioner, engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods, applied for refund of excess duty paid. Despite producing relevant documents, the refund was initially denied on the ground of unjust enrichment. After multiple appeals and remands, the petitioner was eventually granted the refund amount. However, the petitioner was not paid interest on the refund as per Section 11 B of the Act. The court held that the petitioner is entitled to interest on the refund amount from June 2007 till the actual date of refund in 2009.Denial of Interest on Refund Amount:The department had denied interest on the refund amount, arguing that the petitioner did not produce necessary documents initially to prove unjust enrichment. However, after subsequent submissions of supporting documents, the department accepted the claim for refund. The court found that the petitioner should be granted interest on the refund amount from June 2007 onwards, considering the delay in processing the refund due to remands and reexaminations.Consideration of Supporting Documents for Unjust Enrichment:The court noted that the petitioner had submitted various documents, including Cost Accountant Certificate and other evidence, to prove that there was no unjust enrichment and that they were entitled to the refund. Despite the department's initial denial and subsequent remands, the court found that the petitioner had sufficiently demonstrated their case for refund and interest. The court modified the impugned order to allow the petitioner to receive interest on the refund amount as per Section 11 B of the Act.This judgment highlights the importance of providing necessary documentation to support refund claims and the entitlement to interest on refund amounts as per the relevant legal provisions.