Appeal dismissed, interest from order date. Statute governs interest calculation.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the decision to grant interest on refund only from three months after the date of the order setting aside the demand, in accordance with Section 35FF. The appellant's claim for interest from the date of deposit during the investigation was rejected, emphasizing that interest is payable as per the statutory provision. Previous judgments and the specific wording of Section 35FF were cited to support the conclusion that interest is not payable from the date of deposit but as per the prescribed timeline outlined in the law.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Entitlement of interest on refund from the date of deposit made during investigation.
2. Applicability of Section 35FF for determining the period for interest payment on refunds.
3. Relevance of previous judgments in similar cases.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Entitlement of interest on refund from the date of deposit made during investigation:
The appellant argued that interest should be payable from the date of deposit of duty during the investigation, citing the CESTAT Chandigarh judgment in the case of Riba Textiles Limited vs. CCE & ST, Panchkula, which supports this claim. The lower authorities, however, granted interest only from the date of the order setting aside the demand, not from the date of deposit.

2. Applicability of Section 35FF for determining the period for interest payment on refunds:
The respondent countered that the interest is governed by Section 35FF, which stipulates that interest is payable only after three months from the date of the order by which the demand was set aside. This position was upheld in a previous appeal by the Revenue against the same impugned order, where the Tribunal dismissed the appeal and confirmed that interest is payable only as per Section 35FF. The Tribunal's order stated:
"Section 35FF clearly stipulates that if the refund is not granted within three months from communication of the order by the Appellate Authority, the Revenue is under obligation to pay the interest from three months of the communication of the order."

3. Relevance of previous judgments in similar cases:
The Tribunal referred to the judgment in Petronet LNG Limited vs. CC, Ahmedabad, which reinforced that any refund of pre-deposit is governed by Section 35FF, and interest is not payable from the date of deposit. The Tribunal emphasized that:
"Section 35FF does not discriminate to deposit made prior to enactment of Section 35FF or thereafter. Therefore, for deposit which is to be refunded shall be governed by Section 35FF."
Additionally, the Tribunal cited multiple Supreme Court judgments, such as Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh v. Doaba Co-operative Sugar Mills, which held that refund claims must adhere to the statutory limitations and cannot be processed outside the provisions of the relevant Acts.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal concluded that the appellant is not entitled to interest from the date of deposit but only from three months after the date of the order setting aside the demand, as per Section 35FF. The appeal was dismissed, and the decision of the lower authorities was upheld. The Tribunal stated:
"Interest is payable under Section 35FF wherein there is no provision for payment of interest on refund from the date of deposit. Hence, rejection of interest held by Commissioner (Appeals) is upheld and the appeal is dismissed."

Final Order:
The appeal was dismissed, and the Tribunal upheld the lower authority's decision to grant interest only from three months after the date of the order setting aside the demand, in accordance with Section 35FF.

---