Interest on abated duty and delayed refund under capacity-based levy rules; refund interest allowed after statutory period expired.

Interest was not payable on duty later found abated under the Pan Masala Packing Machines Rules, 2008 because the liability was required to be paid in advance and no provision entitled the assessee to interest on the amount subsequently abated for the period of default, so that claim failed. Interest on delayed refund, however, accrued after expiry of three months from filing of the abatement claims because sanction came later than the statutory period, and the assessee was entitled to interest for the delayed interval until refund was sanctioned.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether interest was payable on the duty amount later found to be abated under the Pan Masala Packing Machines (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2008; (ii) whether the appellant was entitled to interest on delayed refund beyond three months from the date of filing of the abatement claims.

Issue (i): Whether interest was payable on the duty amount later found to be abated under the Pan Masala Packing Machines (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2008.

Analysis: Duty under the relevant rules was payable in advance by the 5th day of the month. The appellant failed to make timely payment and discharged the liability only with interest. Although the abatement claims were later allowed, there was no provision making the assessee entitled to interest on the amount subsequently abated for the period of default.

Conclusion: The claim for interest on the abated amount was rejected and was against the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the appellant was entitled to interest on delayed refund beyond three months from the date of filing of the abatement claims.

Analysis: The abatement claims were filed in July and August 2012, while sanction was granted on 29 November 2012, which was beyond three months from the respective dates of application. Interest on delayed refund becomes payable after the expiry of the statutory period, as affirmed in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Union of India.

Conclusion: The appellant was entitled to interest from the expiry of three months after filing of the refund claims until sanction, and this issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only to the limited extent of interest on delayed refund, while the claim for interest on the abated duty amount failed.

---