TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (5) TMI 76
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(Appeals) denied the interest under Section 11BB on the refund which was sanctioned to the Appellant vide Order dated 12.12.2013 passed by the Ld. Assistant Commissioner, Gauhati. 2. The facts of the case in brief are that the Appellant is a manufacturer of Branded Chewing Tobacco classifiable under Chapter Heading 2404 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Appellant is having a manufacturing unit at the industrial Complex, Bonda, Guwahati-781026. The Appellant is duly registered under the Central Excise Act and paying the Central Excise duty under the terms and conditions of Notification No. 32/99 dated 08.07.1999. 3. In the year 1999, the Central Government exercising its power under Section 5A of Central Excise Act, 1944 read....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Excise Duty in respect of the goods manufactured in their unit during the above referred period. The Appellant in order to claim the refund for the said period amounting to Rs.3,96,27,347/- submitted the requisite documents alongwith the proof of payments to the Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner. Accordingly, a Show Cause Notice dated 07.09.2021 was issued to the Appellant for denying the benefit of Exemption Notification No.32/99-CE dated 08.07.1999 and consequential rejection of refund claim amounting to Rs.3,96,27,347/. The said Show Cause Notice was challenged by the Appellant before the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court vide Writ Petition No. 1384/2002. The Hon'ble Gauhati High Court directed the Customs Authorities to take a fresh d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....No.32/99-CE dated 08.07.1999 did not provide for any provision for interest on delayed payment of refund. The Appellant against the said Order preferred an appeal to the Ld.Commissioner (Appeals), Customs, Excise and Service Tax (NER), Guwahati. The Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) upheld the order of the Assistant Commissioner and rejected the Appeal of the Appellant. Hence, the Appellant has preferred the present Appeal. 7. The Ld. Advocate Shri Anurag Mishra appeared on behalf of the Appellant and submitted that the provisions of Section 11BB are fully applicable to the present case as the Notification No. 32/99-CE dated 08.07.1999 did not restrict application of Sections and Rules provided under the Central Excise Law. He also submitted tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Gauhati High Court, the Department preferred S.L.P. before the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported at 2017 (349) E.L.T. A89 (S.C.), which was dismissed on the ground of limitation. Therefore, the Ld. Advocate submitted that the Appellant is entitled for refund of interest immediately after 3 (three) months from the date of submission of refund under Section 11BB. 9. Shri J. Chattopadhyay, Ld.Authorized Representative for the Department contended that in the case of M/s Dharampal Satyapal Ltd. Vs. UOI reported at 2018 (362) E.L.T. 776 (Gau.) under similar facts and circumstances of the case allowed the interest on delayed payment of refund under Section 11BB but the Department has preferred S.L.P. against the said Order before the Hon'ble Su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....xemption Notification No. 32/99-CE dated 08.07.1999 is a self contained law wherein detailed conditions, safeguard and limitation has been provided for giving the effect to the said Exemption Notification. The said Notification does not have any provisions for grant of any interest and therefore, in absence of legal provisions in the said Notification, he rejected the refund of interest under Section 11BB. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) vide its Order dated 28.04.2015 upheld the findings of the Learned Assistant Commissioner. Therefore, the grounds taken by the Ld. Assistant Commissioner are identical to the case referred by the Learned Advocate. 12. The Hon'ble High Court of Gauhati in the case of M/sAmalgamated Plantations (P.) Ltd., V....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... SLP filed against the above referred order before the Hon'ble Supreme Court was dismissed on the ground of limitation which is reported at 2017 (349) E.L.T. A89 (S.C.). 15. We find that in the case of M/s.Dharampal Satyapal Ltd. Vs. UOI reported at 2018 (362) E.L.T.776 (Gau.), the Hon'ble High Court passed a similar Order and allowed the interest on account of delayed payment of refund under Section 11BB. The SLP filed against the said Order by the Revenue reported at 2018 (362) E.L.T. A208 (S.C.) is pending before the Hon'bleSupreme Court and the notice was issued. We also find that no stay from the operation of the Order of the Hon'ble High Court was granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Under the prevailing circumstances the Order of....