TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (11) TMI 251
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es and technical testing and analysis services. Three of the said claims have been rejected by the Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise, Udaipur, vide Order-in-Original No. 113 dated 02.03.2009 and Order-in-Original No. 402-402 dated 25.09.2009. Aggrieved by the order of the Deputy Commissioner, the Appellant filed an appeal against rejection of their refund claim. The Commissioner (Appeals-II), Jaipur vide Order-in-Appeal No. 282 dated 12.08.2010 and Order-in-Appeal No. 409 dated 27.10.2010, dismissed the appeal of the appellant. Being still aggrieved, the Appellant filed an appeal before this Tribunal challenging the order of the Commissioner (Appeals-II). 2.1 Tribunal vide Final Order No. 50115-50117/2015 (DB) dated 09.01.2015, affirmed the eligibility of the appellant to refund claim and remanded the matter to the lower authorities for re-examination. In compliance thereof a detailed submission before the Assistant Commissioner, Central Tax, Udaipur, was filed by the appellant on 11.02.2015. Vide Order-in-Original No. 02/15-ST(Ref) dated 07.05.2015 and Order-in-Original No. 03/15-ST(Ref) dated 07.05.2015 the refund in respect of the three of the refund claims was sanctioned. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntitled for the interest w.e.f. the year 2008-09, but it could get sanctioned, only in the year 2018. The delay of more than 10 years for getting the amount of interest refunded entitles the appellant to be compensated for the same. It is impressed upon that interest is compensatory in nature, therefore, interest on delayed sanction of interest is payable. Learned Counsel has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sandvik Asia Ltd. Vs. CIT reported as 2006 (196) ELT 257 (S.C) and that the ratio has not be disapproved by Hon'ble larger bench in Gujrat Fluorochemicals Vs. CIT reported as 2008 (300) ITR 328 (Guj.). 3.1 It is submitted that the said decision has not been overruled rather has been relied upon by Supreme Court in a subsequent decision in the case of CIT Vs. Gujarat Fluoro Chemicals itself. Even the division bench of Gujrat, after the matter was referred back by the Supreme Court, is of the opinion that there is general principle for awarding compensation to the assessee for the delay in receiving interest properly due to it. It is alleged that the Appellate Authority below has ignored the said decisions rather the order-under-challenge suffer ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on'ble Apex Court may be granted to the assessee. There is no power vested with the Tribunal to grant compensation in view of delay, if any. It is impressed upon that there is no infirmity, as alleged, in the order-under-challenge. Appeal is, accordingly, prayed to be dismissed. 5. After hearing the rival contentions of the parties and perusing the appeal record as well as the case law relied upon. We observe and hold as follows : Present is the case where the appellant had filed refund claims in respect of service tax paid on certain services received and used for the export of goods during the period from April, 2008 to June, 2008. The refund claims were accordingly filed on 29.08.2008 & 29.06.09. These refund claim Appeals were initially rejected, however, this Tribunal vide order dated 09.01.2015 while affirming the eligibility of the appellant to said refund claims, remanded the matter back to the lower authorities for re-examination. It is, thereafter that three of refund claims as were filed under Notification No. 41/2007 dated 06.10.2007 were got sanctioned by the original adjudication authority vide its order dated 07.05.2015. However, no interest was sanctioned from ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....terest is allowed on delayed refunds. But the provision is silent about any interest on delayed payment of interest as claimed herein. Learned Counsel for appellant has relied upon Sandvik Asia Ltd. (Supra) case, impressing upon that the Hon'ble Apex Court has allowed such amount in case of apparent delay. But it is observed that there has been expressed clarification that such interest only can be claimed by an assessee which is provided under the statute and no other interest on such statutory interest can be granted. The relevant para of the decision of a division bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court while considereing a reference doubting correctness of their previous decision of Sandvik Asia case had held as : "In our considered view, the aforesaid judgment has been misquoted and misinterpreted by the assessees and also by the Revenue. They are of the view that in Sandvik case (supra) this Court had directed the Revenue to pay interest on the statutory interest in case of delay in the payment. In other words, the interpretation placed is that the Revenue is obliged to pay an interest on interest in the event of its failure to refund the interest payable within the statutory peri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ever would be available by way of compensatory measure. 17. In our view, the general principles for awarding compensation to the Assessee for the delay in receiving monies properly due to it is not disapproved by the Larger Bench of the Apex Court in the case of Gujarat Fluoro Chemicals (supra). 18. In view of the aforesaid observations and discussion, we find that the petitioner - Assessee would be entitled to compensation and the interest can be awarded by way of compensation, but would not be entitled to further compensation by way of interest on such interest, which is awarded as compensation. 19. Under these circumstances, we find that the Court can take a reasonable approach when the interest is to be awarded by way of compensatory measure, but with further caution that the interest on such interest cannot be ordered as per the above referred latter decision of the Apex Court in the case of Gujarat Fluoro Chemicals (supra)." The Hon'ble Apex Court in this case while relying upon the decision of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Narender Doshil 254 ITR 606 (S.P) has, however, held that the Revenue is liable to pay compensation on the amount of interest which it should h....