2023 (7) TMI 1176

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....his order, the salient facts are reiterated. 2. At the outset, the delays of about 243 days against the main order and 43 days against the subsequent order are condoned in view of the good grounds shown. 3. The legal issue that has arisen here is as to whether the respondent assessee was entitled to any interest on the delayed refund made by the Department. There is no doubt that Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 does not provide for any payment of interest for refund of duty or interest. However, the moot question here is whether the refund that the respondent assessee was found liable to be was on account of excess duty or interest paid. 4. Since it is the unarguable position that the refund that the assessee was found entitl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....onsiderable period of time and such deposit was neither on account of any cenvat credit demand or on account of any claim for penalty or interest, the refund that the assessee was found entitled to, ought to carry interest. 7. The Department refused to pay any interest as the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal had not provided for any interest in the appellate order. The assessee again knocked at the doors of the Appellate Tribunal to claim that the refund that the assessee had received ought to have been paid with interest. The legal issue urged was that the possible embargo that is read into the payment of interest on account of refund of duty or refund of interest or the like in Section 11B of the Act would not apply whe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rtment's application for correction or modification was rejected. According to the Tribunal, the deposit was made at a time when no quantified claim had been made on the assessee. On such basis, the Tribunal found that the deposit had not been made on account of any duty or interest which would attract the implied bar under Section 11B of the Act. It was a possible view taken on the set of facts that presented themselves before the Tribunal and, in this appellate jurisdiction, such interpretation does not call for any interference. Further, as to the quantum of interest awarded, the Tribunal, which is a specialised body dealing in matters pertaining to excise duty, took into account the previous judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts a....