TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (3) TMI 998
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t, 2012 was filed by the appellant on 2nd April, 2013. The said claim was initially rejected vide the Order-in-Original No. 7/2013, dated 28th June, 2013. The appeal thereof was also rejected, however, this Tribunal vide Final Order No. 53758, dated 23rd November, 2015 held the appellant entitled for the refund of duty along with the interest for the alleged delayed deposit of duty. In consequence to the said order of this Tribunal, the Department vide Order-in-Original No. 72/2016, dated 15th March, 2016 sanctioned the refund, however, without any interest. In an appeal thereof, appellant was held entitled for interest as well, however, at the rate of 6%, as against the interest claimed at the rate of 12% by the appellant. Being still aggr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rt and Supreme Court has the inherent powers of making decisions, it is submitted that the interest at the rate of 6% has rightly been fixed. Appeal is, accordingly, prayed to be dismissed. 4. After hearing both the parties, perusing records and the order under challenge, I observe and hold as follows :- 5. The point to be adjudicated herein is of a very narrow scope that is as to whether the appellant is entitled for interest on the delayed payment of refund either at the rate of 6% or at the rate of 12% of the amount of refund. The relevant statute for the purpose of Section 11BB, which reads as follows :- "Section 11BB. Interest on delayed refunds. - If any duty is ordered to be refunded under sub-section (2) of sectio....