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 Commissioner's Orders on Refund & Interest Payment</h1> <h3>JAMSHRI RANJITSINGHJI Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE-III</h3> JAMSHRI RANJITSINGHJI Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE-III - 2010 (250) E.L.T. 536 (Tri. - Mumbai) Issues:Interest on interest.Analysis:The case involved the recovery of duty by encashing bank guarantees, with a surplus amount appropriated towards interest under Section 11AA of the Central Excise Act. The appellant appealed against the demand of interest, leading to a series of orders and appeals. The Commissioner (Appeals) initially remanded the case for de novo adjudication, which eventually resulted in the appellant being held not liable for interest on duty. The appellant then sought a refund of the interest paid, which was partially granted by the Assistant Commissioner, but with an amount appropriated for wrongly availed CENVAT credit. The Commissioner (Appeals) later allowed the appeal against this appropriation, citing legal precedents supporting the refund of illegally collected amounts. The appellant then claimed interest on the refunded amount, leading to further appeals and arguments.The main contention revolved around the appellant's claim for interest on the refunded amount of Rs.2,58,044/-, based on various legal references and principles. The appellant argued for interest payment on equitable grounds, citing lack of specific statutory provisions for such refunds. The Tribunal, however, emphasized the need for specific claims for equitable relief and highlighted the applicability of Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act for interest on refunded duty amounts. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) order granting interest from three months after the date of the appellate authority's decision to the date of refund, based on the principles of Section 11BB.In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed both appeals, affirming the Commissioner (Appeals) orders regarding the refund and interest payment on the refunded amount. The decision was based on the application of Section 11BB principles and the lack of grounds for equitable relief beyond statutory provisions.This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the progression of the case, the legal arguments presented by both parties, and the final decision based on statutory provisions and legal precedents.
TaxTMI 