TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 271
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant for fabrication and supply of various iron & steel projects. Under the rate contracts, the Appellant was required to claim Cenvat credit and also avail exemption in respect of the projects under International Competitive Bidding under Notification No. 6/2006- CE dated 01.03.2006. The Appellant was thus supplied inputs by BHEL and its vendors and the Appellant availed Cenvat credit on such duty paid inputs. After fabrication, the final product was supplied by the Appellant without payment of duty by claiming exemption under Notification No. 6/2006-CE dated 1.3.2006(Supra). It is the case of the Department that since the Appellant has not paid duty on final products, hence the Appellant is not eligible for claiming Cenvat credit on inputs. Accordingly, on the directions of the Superintendent, the Appellant reversed the amount of Cenvat credit while filing ER-1 returns for the months of October 2008, December 2008 & January 2009. However, subsequently on the basis of legal opinion, the Appellant became aware that Cenvat credit was rightly taken and accordingly the Appellant informed the Superintendent vide letter dated 05.10.2009 that the Appellant is taking credit of the same amo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion to the Revenue would be a correction of the accounts. There are many decisions of the Tribunal laying down that such accounting correction will not require filing of refund claims. In as much as the credit entry was made under intimation to the Revenue, the same will have the effect of seeking, Revenue's permission. As such, I deem fit to set aside the impugned order and remand the same to the Original Adjudicating Authority for examining the issue afresh, first on merits and then on the issue of Suo-moto taking of credit." 4. As the amount of Rs 18,86,138/- deposited by the Appellant was in the nature of 'duty' as provided in unamended Section 35F and by order dated 14.11.2017, the Tribunal set-aside the adjudication order and remanded back the matter to the Adjudicating Authority for examining the matter afresh, hence the Appellant requested for refund of Rs 18,86,138/- along with interest. 5. The Order-in-Original dated 02.02.2019 was then passed by the Adjudicating Authority again confirming the demand by holding that the suo-moto credit was illegal. By Order-in-Original dated 15.03.2019, the Adjudicating Authority also rejected the claim of refund in consequence....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g Authority sanctioned refund of Rs 18,86,138/- but denied interest on the ground that the amount in question was deposited prior to amendment of Section 35F and introduction of Section 35FF, hence the unamended provisions will be applicable and interest is payable only if the amount is not refunded within a period of three months from the date of communication of order sanctioning refund, whereas in the present case the amount has been refunded within a period of three months. 9. Aggrieved with the Order-in-Original dated 20.10.2021, the Appellant preferred appeal before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), which has been dismissed by the impugned Order-in-Appeal dated 04.03.2022. Hence, the present appeal before this Tribunal. 10. The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Appellant submits that the impugned Order-in-Appeal dated 04.03.2022 is arbitrary as there was a specific direction in the order dated 04.08.2021 passed by the Tribunal that the amount of Rs 18,86,138/ is to be refunded along with interest in accordance with law and the interest is payable under Section 35FF from the date of deposit to the date of refund @ 12%. 10.1 In absence of any challenge to order dated....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....an furnish no ground for not following it unless its operation has been suspended by a competent court. If this healthy rule is not followed, the result will only be undue harassment to assessees and chaos in administration of tax laws". 10.3 The binding effect of the order dated 04.08.2021 passed by this Tribunal would not depend upon whether any particular argument of the Revenue was considered by this Tribunal or not, provided that the binding with reference to which an argument was subsequently advanced was actually decided. Thus, the Adjudicating Authority cannot be allowed to plead that any particular fact was considered by this Tribunal or not. 10.4 If the Adjudicating Authority had some confusion with the directions given by this Tribunal, it was always open for him to seek clarification from the Tribunal or move an application seeking Rectification of Mistake. However, without moving such application seeking clarification/rectification of mistake, it was not open for the Adjudicating Authority to ignore the binding directions of this Tribunal. Reliance in this regard is placed on RBF Rig Corporation v. Commissioner of Customs (Imports), Mumbai, 2011 (264) E.L.T. 486 (S.C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....their conclusion or of any factual mala fides but with the fact that the officers, in reaching their conclusion, by-passed two appellate orders in regard to the same issue which were placed before them, one of the Collector (Appeals) and the other of the Tribunal. The High Court has, in our view, rightly criticised this conduct of the Assistant Collectors and the harassment to the assessee caused by the failure of these officers to give effect to the orders of authorities higher to them in the appellate hierarchy. It cannot be too vehemently emphasised that it is of utmost importance that, in disposing of the quasi-judicial issues before them, revenue officers are bound by the decisions of the appellate authorities. The order of the Appellate Collector is binding on the Assistant Collectors working within his jurisdiction and the order of the Tribunal is binding upon the Assistant Collectors and the Appellate Collectors who function under the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. The principles of judicial discipline require that the orders of the higher appellate authorities should be followed unreservedly by the subordinate authorities. The mere fact that the order of the appellate autho....