2011 (5) TMI 474

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for recovery of interest under Rule 8(3) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 and also for imposing penalty under Rule 25(1). The adjudicating authority confirmed the duty of Rs.9,65,000/- along with interest under Rule 8(3) and also imposed penalty of equal amount under Rule 25(1). On appeal to Commissioner(Appeals), the Commissioner (Appeals) while confirming duty demand along with interest, reduced the penalty to Rs.2,50,000/-. Appellant filed an appeal to Tribunal along with stay application. During the pendency of the appeal, the appellant in addition to duty, had also paid interest on the same as per the rates specified in Rule 8(3) of Central Excise Rules and the total interest paid was Rs.6,55,519/-. The Tribunal decided their appeal vide....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....count of final order dated 28.12.06 of the Tribunal, the amount of Rs.2,46,755/- which represented the excess interest paid by them had become refundable, that they took its credit in the PLA under intimation to Assistant Commissioner, that since no just enactment was involved, no refund application was required to be filed, that the judgement of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of BDH Industries Ltd. vs. CCE, Mumbai-I reported in 2008(229)/ELT/364(Tri.-LB), is not applicable to the facts of that case as in that case, the Tribunal s Larger Bench has held that suo-moto refund of excess duty by the way of self credit the PLA is not permitted and any correction in PLA/Cenvat account needs to have department s sanction, while in thi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ided by the Tribunal vide final order dated 28.12.06, the Tribunal besides setting aside the penalty, also held that they would be required to pay interest only @ 2% per month. There is no dispute that on account of Tribunal s order, their interest liability got reduced to Rs.4,08,764/- and the excess interest paid Rs2,46,755/- became refundable. The point of dispute is as to whether the appellant for refund of this amount should have filed a refund application under section 11B of Central Excise Act or they could take it suo-moto credit in the PLA. During the period prior to 11.05.08, section 11B provided for refund of duty only and as such was not applicable for refund of interest. The provisions of this section were extended to refund of....