TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Upholds Interest Entitlement for Delayed Refund under Central Excise Act</h1> <h3>Commr. of C. Ex., Cus. & S.T., Hyderabad-III Versus Eveready Indus. India Ltd.</h3> Commr. of C. Ex., Cus. & S.T., Hyderabad-III Versus Eveready Indus. India Ltd. - 2016 (343) E.L.T. 567 (Tri. - Bang.) Issues:1. Entitlement to interest claim under Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944.2. Calculation of interest period for delayed sanction of the refund amount.Analysis:Issue 1: Entitlement to Interest ClaimThe appeal was filed by the Revenue against the order allowing interest claim under Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 in favor of the respondent. The respondent had initially filed a refund application on 19-3-1998, which was rejected due to lack of evidence. After contesting in appellate forums, the appeal was eventually allowed on 31-3-2005, leading to a refund claim of &8377; 54,97,351/-. The Central Excise department sanctioned a partial refund on 22-8-2005, following which the respondent claimed interest of &8377; 22,82,401/- for the delayed refund. The original authority rejected the interest claim, but the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed it on 23-2-2007. The issue revolved around whether interest was payable for the period of delay in refund sanction.Issue 2: Calculation of Interest PeriodThe statutory framework under Sections 11B and 11BB of the Act governs refund claims and interest payments on delayed refunds. Section 11BB mandates that interest is payable if the refund is not made within three months from the date of the refund application. In this case, the refund was sanctioned on 22-8-2005, more than seven years after the initial application. The Tribunal held that interest was due from 19-6-1998 to 22-8-2005, as the refund was paid after the expiration of the three-month period. The judgment cited the Supreme Court's decision in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Union of India to support the claim for interest.ConclusionThe Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal, emphasizing that the interest claim was valid under Section 11BB of the Act due to the delayed refund sanction. The case laws cited by the Revenue were deemed irrelevant to the present case, as the circumstances differed. The judgment highlighted the clear statutory provisions governing interest payments on delayed refunds and upheld the respondent's entitlement to interest from the specified period.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
