2018 (4) TMI 57

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t of interest before issuance of show cause notice. On pointing out by the audit, subsequently show cause notice was issued for denial of credit of Rs. 48 lakhs approximately. The Additional Commissioner adjudicated the show cause notice confirming the demand of Rs. 5,72,217/- and demanded interest of Rs. 21,634/-. Therefore, there was an excess debit of cenvat credit as well as interest attributed to the said excess amount for which the refund claim was filed. The adjudicating authority has sanctioned the refund. The Revenue filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who allowed the appeal of the Revenue on the ground of time bar for the reason that the refund was filed on 17.2.2016 i.e. after one year from the reversal of credit made ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (ec) of Section 11B(5)(B), according to which the refund is maintainable if it becomes refundable consequent the judgment, decree, order or direction of appellate authority, appellate tribunal or any court. In such case, the date of judgment, decree, order or direction should be the relevant date. He submits that in the present case, the refund is consequent to the order-in-original passed by the Additional Commissioner who does not fall under any authority such as appellate authority, appellate tribunal or any court. Therefore, the present refund has not become payable in terms of clause (ec) of Section 11B(5)(B). He placed reliance on the following judgments:- (i) Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd. - 2005 (191) ELT 549 (Tri.-Chennai); (ii) USV ....