TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (5) TMI 34
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Rs. 33,90,449.91 was confirmed by way of order dated 04.01.1985 and penalty of Rs. 25,00,000/- was also imposed but the said order was challenged before this Tribunal and this Tribunal vide order dated 21.01.1987 dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee, thereafter, the assessee filed the appeal before the Hon'ble Apex Court and paid the entire amount confirmed against them i.e. Rs. 58,90,449.91 for entertaining the appeal before the Hon'ble Apex Court. Vide order dated 11.12.1996, the Hon'ble Apex Court set aside the order of this Tribunal dated 21.01.1987 and remanded the proceedings to the adjudicating authority for de-novo adjudication. In pursuant order of the Hon'ble Apex court, the assessee was entitled to claim fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rest on the delayed refund from the date after 3 months from the date of order of higher forum till its realization. He also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Ghaziabad Ship Breakers Ltd. reported in 2010 (259) ELT 522 (Guj) to say that the pre deposit made by the assessee under Section 35(N) of the Act is equivalent to pre deposit made under Section 35(F) of the Act and pre deposit is a pre deposit to the entertain the appeal. He drew my attention to the order of this Tribunal in the case of Galaxy Entertainment Corpn. Ltd. reported in 2010 (259) ELT 427 (Tri. Mum.) to say that in terms of the Board Circular, the assessee entitled for the interest of delayed refund after three months from the da....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sue No. 3 Whether the assessee is entitled to claim interest after three months from the date of the order of the Hon'ble Apex Court dated 11.12.1996 till its realization or not? 7. I have gone through the issue no.1 whether the assessee is required to file an application for refund claim to the order of Hon'ble Apex Court on 11.12.1996 or not? 8. I have gone through the CBEC Circular no.802/35/2004-CX dated 08.12.2004, the relevant contents of the circular reproduced as under: 4. Accordingly, the contents of the circular no.275/37/2000-CX. 8A dated 2-1-2002 [2002 (139) ELT T38] as to the modalities for return of the pre-deposits are reiterated. It is again reiterated that in terms of Hon'ble Supreme Court's order such p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Act, is required to deposit with the proper officer duty and interest demanded or penalty levied. Section 129-E of the Act falls under Chapter XV under the heading Appeals. Chapter XV of the Act is comprised of various provisions from Section 128 to Section 131C of the Act. Section 130 of the Act which provides for appeal to High Court and Section 130-E of the Act which provides for appeal is Supreme Court also fall under Chapter XV. Thus, an appeal before the Supreme Court would also be an appeal under the said Chapter as envisaged under Section 129E of the Act. Thus, any amount deposited during the pendency of an appeal before the High Court or the Supreme Court would also be by way of deposit under Section 129E of the Act and has to b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a). The facts of the said case are not relevant to the facts of the case in hand. In fact, in the said case, the assessee file rebate claim of duty paid on the export of the goods and the Hon'ble Apex Court held that the interest is payable to refund after three months of the date of the application. In the said case, it was not the issue before the Hon'ble Apex Court whether in pursuant the order passed by the Appellate Court, the assessee required to file application for refund claim or not, therefore, the facts of the said case are not applicable to the facts of this case and the assessee is not required to file any application for refund claim. Admittedly, the CBEC Circular is clarifies that the refund claim is to be sanctioned ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt to pay interest to the appellant in terms of the Circular Bearing No.802/35/204-CX., dated 8.12.2004 on the pre deposit of the delayed refund within two months from today it has to be constructed that this court meant the rate of interest which was awarded by the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. ITC Limited which was the rate quantified by the Supreme Court in the absence of any statutory provisions in the said Act. 20. Therefore, in view of the fact that the period for which the petitioner is entitled to interest on the pre deposit of the delayed refund was the same as in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise V. ITC ltd. (Supra) parity demands that the petitioner is also entitled for interest @ 12% p....