Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter

Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review

The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.

• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required


Step 2 – Draft Generation

Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.

• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review.

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2015 (10) TMI 368

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... as per the provision 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 for the period of delay in sanctioning the refund. The issue involved in the present case whether appellant is entitle for interest on refund which has already been sanctioned under Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 for the delayed period in sanctioning the said refund. 2. Shri. Sanjay Hasija, Ld. Superintendent (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue submits that interest in the present case is not applicable for the reason that respondent have delayed in providing complete information and due to which sanction of claim got delayed. He further submits that this refund was sanctioned against remand order of the CESTAT wherein certain information was directed to be verified there....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of Section 11BB after three months from the date of refund application and there is no restrictions or prohibition provided under Section11B to avoid the interest. 4. I have carefully considered the submission made by both sides. 5. I find that after passing of Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd case, if refund is sanctioned belatedly beyond three months from the date of application, interest is unavoidably payable to the assessee. On careful reading of the Commissioner (Appeals) order, I find that he has given elaborated findings and allowed interest on the refund, the findings is extracted below: 4. I have gone through the appeal papers, written submissions during the course of personal hearing and ab....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nal Tax Tribunal] or, as the case may be, by the court shall be deemed to be an order passed under the said sub-section (2) for the purposes of this section.] 7. I find that as per provisions of Section 11BB of the said Act, it has been laid down that in case amount is not refunded by the department within three months from the date of application, then the department is obliged to pay interest, calculated at the rate notified by the Central Government, to the claimant from the date of expiry of three months from the date of receipt of application till the date of refund of such duty. 8. I further find that vide explanation to the said Section 11BB of the said Act it has been explained that in case any order of refund is made by the C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tment cannot take contrary stand. 11. I find that the only contention of the department to reject the claim of interest of the appellants is that the department conducted certain verifications as per directions of the Hon'able CESTAT, vide its order dated 09.03.2011; that the order has been passed within time period of three months from the date of latest/last information/clarification that was made available to the department and hence the provisions of Section 11BB of the said Act are not attracted for these cases. 12. I find that basically department was obliged to examine the refund claim in right perspective and decide the issue. It is clear from the facts of the case that department had not carried out the necessary verifica....