2022 (6) TMI 301

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or the Appellant Ms. Tamanna Alam, Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER The issue involved in this appeal is whether from the refundable amount, adjustment have been rightly made for the amount of interest and penalty, which is sub judice before the higher court of appeal. 2. The brief facts are that vide order-in-original dated 05/08/2020 relating to the period December ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y interest. 3. Thereafter, the appellant filed refund claim for the balance amount of Rs. 1,11,49,884/- or (5,52,79,359-4,41,29,475). This refund claim was adjudicated vide Order-in-Original dated 31/12/2020 and adjusted an amount of Rs. 27,02,518/- towards interest on the Cenvat credit wrongly availed for the period September 2012 to November 2012 and also recovered the amount of penalty of Rs....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ccordingly, the learned Counsel states that there is miscarriage of justice by adjusting sub judice amount of interest and penalty. Accordingly, he prays for allowing the appeal with consequential benefit. 6. Learned DR relies on the impugned order. 7. Having considered rival contentions, I find that Section 11 of the Central Excise Act grants power to the Central Excise officers, being in t....