TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (7) TMI 449
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....;S/Shri K.S. Ravi Shankar and N. Anand, learned Advocates appeared for the applicants and Shri R.K. Singla, Jt. CDR for the Revenue. 3. Shri Ravi Shankar, learned Advocate stated that this Tribunal passed Final order No. 308/2005, dated 20-8-2005 allowing the appeal of the applicants holding that the appellants had not passed on the duty incidence to any person and thereby the doctrine of unjust enrichment was attracted and the appellants were entitled for refund claim for a sum of Rs. 60,77,177/-. Further the Tribunal was pleased to grant consequential relief. The jurisdictional authority granted the said refund after deducting the time-bared claim under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The refund was sanctioned as per th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....be sustainable or erroneous by the Courts, it follows that the authority has acted wrongfully in the sense of not in accordance with law and compensation to the party deprived must follow. (ii) Kuil Fireworks Industries v. CCE [1997 (95) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) wherein the Apex Court has held that the assessee cannot be made to suffer on account of illegal act of departmental authorities and the duty refund claim settled in such cases is entitled for 12% interest and it will be bounden responsibility on the part of the Departmental authorities to settle such refund claim with 12% interest. (iii) Hamdard (Wakf) Laboratories v. UOI [2005 (188) E.L.T. 476 (All.)] wherein the High Court has held that an order for refund having been made muc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uch rate, [not below five per cent] and not exceeding thirty per cent per annum as is for the time being fixed [by the Central Government, by Notification in the Official Gazette] on such duty from the date immediately after the expiry of three months from the date of receipt of such application till the date of refund of such duty : Provided that where any duty ordered to be refunded under sub-section (2) of section 11B in respect of an application under sub-section (1) of that section made before the date on which the Finance Bill, 1995 receives the assent of the President, is no refunded within three months from such date, there shall be paid to the applicant interest under this section from the date immediately after three months from ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r referred as the proper officer). The aforesaid refund claim was rejected by the proper office by passing order No. 112/RFD/2001 dated 12-6-2001 issued under file No. VGN (30) 151/TD/RFD/KM SAT/2000 on the ground that the Applicant failed to produce documentary evidence to establish that they have not passed on the incidence of the duty as required under section 11B of CEA 1944. Feeling aggrieved, the applicant preferred the appeal against the above referred OIO. The Commissioner (A) C. Ex. Mumbai vide OIA No. SDK (14740137 AUR/2002 dated 28-2-2002 held that the refund as admissible on merit but the same cannot be given to the applicant as the applicant did not produce documentary evidence to show that they have not passed on the duty burd....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....red along with interest in case they fail to refund/pay the amount in the event the appeal filed by the Department in the High Court or any further appeal filed, if any is decided in favour of the Department. Sd/- Assistant Commissioner Central Excise and Customs Aurangabad-II Divn. Copy to : Superintendent C. Ex. W.R-ll Aurangabad Divn." A perusal of the Show Cause Notice reveals that the same has been issued on the ground that the Revenue has gone in appeal against the Tribunal's order. To put it mildly, the action of the Revenue is the height of judicial indiscipline. If the Revenue had obtained a stay against the implementation of the Tribunal's order, they would be justified in not granting the ref....