2011 (4) TMI 1198

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sed. The adjudicating authority by order dated 22.11.2002 had rejected the claim for payment of interest on the refund amount of Rs. 12,97,747/- which was ordered to be refunded to the appellants under order dated 19.07.2001. 3. The appellants are engaged in manufacture of cane sugar and molasses falling under chapter heading No. 1701 and 1703 in their sugar factory as also ethyl alcohol, fusel oil, India Made Foreign Liquor and Country Liquor in their distillery unit. During the surprise visits by the Central Excise Officers to the factory of the appellants, it was noticed that the appellants had been reversing an amount equivalent to 8% of the value of Indian Made Foreign Liquor manufactured and cleared by them and thereby contravening t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hich came to be dismissed by the impugned order. The Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the claim essentially on two grounds. Firstly, that the refund amount was not an amount relating to the central excise duty as such and, therefore, question of payment of interest does not arise. Secondly, in case the amount is said to be excise duty then certainly the principle of unjust enrichment would be attracted. However, in the case in hand, the said principle had not been applied to the relevant observations in that regard in the impugned order reads thus:- "However, on examination, I find that the issue is not the above at all. The main issue that is to be decided, is whether the amount refunded can at all be treated as duty under Central Exci....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 1297747/- refunded to the appellants in terms of provisions of law comprised under Rule 57CC. The said rule read as under:- "Where a manufacturer is engaged in the manufacture of any final product which is chargeable to duty as well as in any other final product which is exempt from the whole of the duty of the excise leviable thereon or is chargeable to nil rate of duty and the manufacturer takes credit of the specified duty on any inputs (other than inputs used as fuel) which is used or ordinarily used in or in relation to the manufacture of both the aforesaid categories of final products, whether directly or indirectly and whether contained in the said final product or not, the manufacturer shall, unless provisions of sub rule 9 are co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....unt, the question of entertaining the claim for interest by the department at the instance of the appellants in relation to the refund availed under Rule 57CC cannot arise. The authorities are governed by the statutory provisions. Whether the appellants have any claim for interest under general law or not is a totally different issue and the same cannot be gone into either by the authorities below or by this Tribunal. There is a totally independent forum to decide about the same. 9. As regards the contention that there was delay in refunding the amount, the same also does not appear to be correct. The letter dated 03.05.2011 was received by the officer on 08.05.2011 and the refund was ordered on 19.07.2001. It is true that the appellants h....