TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (4) TMI 84
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....refund claimed by the appellant amounting to Rs. 7,10,541/- paid by them during the period February and March, 2016 in respect of which they filed a refund claim on 12.05.2017. The facts of the case in brief are that the appellants are manufacturers of Natural Fertilizers, Microbial based Bio-Fertilizers and were manufacturing a product called Cereal Protein Hydrolysate liquid for use in agriculture. An investigation was initiated by the anti-evasion wing of the Commissionerate who were of the opinion that product deserved to be classified under chapter 38 and accordingly the differential duty needs to be collected from them. During the course of investigation itself, the appellant paid the entire amount of excise duty along with interest a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions of Central Excise Law. ii) The same were not paid under protest and were hit by limitation of time under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. iii) No evidence was submitted, along with the refund claim to prove that the burden of duty, interest and penalty claimed as refund is not passed on to any other person. 5. Aggrieved, the appellant preferred an appeal before the First Appellate Authority who upheld the order of the lower authority and rejected the appeal. Hence this appeal on the following grounds: The Micro Nutrient Fertilizers which they manufacture would fall under Central Excise Tariff Heading 3101. During the year 2005, a notice was issued proposing to re-classify the goods under CETH 3105 which was dropped by the Ad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the officers had pressurized them to pay the excise duty nor have they filed a letter of protest. In view of Section 11AC, where the assessee agrees with the investigation and pays the differential duty and interest and penalties during investigation itself the proceedings are concluded and therefore no show cause notice can be issued or is required to be issued to the appellant. Had the appellant, at any stage, refused to pay the excise duty or paid it under protest or issued a letter to this effect, a show cause notice could have been issued and subsequent proceedings would have been completed. Even when they were issued a letter by the anti-evasion wing on 08.08.2016 stating that the proceedings in respect of classification is closed in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....olding that the payments made by the appellant are not under protest, nor have they refused closure of the case under Section 11AC without issuance of show cause notice. In view of the above, the adjudicating authority held that they are not eligible for any refund of payments made by them voluntarily requesting closure of the case under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 8. Aggrieved, the appellant appealed before the First Appellate Authority who agreed with the finding of the lower authority and rejected the appeal. Hence this appeal on the following grounds: i) The refund was rejected holding that the amount paid was relating to bio-fungicides which fall under CETH 3808 and that they had admitted the liability on bio-fungi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in terms of Section 11AC. In this case, the appellant had voluntarily paid the amounts during the investigation and without protest. Therefore, a letter was issued by the department confirming the payments made by the appellant and stating that the proceedings are need to have been concluded under Section, 11AC. 11. The Learned Counsel for the appellant would assert that the dues were paid as they were made to pay. I do not find any evidence to substantiate this. Duties, penalties, interest etc., cannot be simply collected from the appellant; they have to be paid by them. Assuming that the officers investigating the case had pressurized the appellant to pay the amounts during investigation, the assessee could have immediately, sent a lett....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ess and the same has to be claimed as refund. If the Learned Counsel's argument is stretched further, there would not be a single case of refund admissible on merits which will be hit by time bar because the admissibility of refund on merits would arise only when duty was paid which was not required to be paid or was paid in excess is the amount which was required to be paid. Section 11B is a counter part of Section 11A where duty was required to paid but was not paid and department can issue a demand notice. In both cases, despite merits of the case (refund or demand, as the case may be) a time limit has been prescribed by the Parliament under the relevant sections of the Act which must be adhered to. The cases relied upon by the appellant....