TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 367
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2024 passed by Customs, Excise and Service Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench - New Delhi (which shall be referred hereinafter as "CESTAT") in Service Tax Appeal No.55434/2023 filed against Order-in-Appeal No.IND-EXCUS-000-APP-47-2023-24 dated 23/05/2023 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs, Central Excise & Goods and Service Tax, Indore (M.P.). 3. The brief facts of the case are that M/s Indore Treasure Market City Pvt. Ltd. i.e., the respondent, was engaged in the business of setting-up and managing shopping centers, family entertainment centers, multiplexes, etc. Popularly known as "Malls". The respondent registered itself with the Service Tax Department for Renting of Immovable Property Service, Maintenance and Repair Service....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... The learned CESTAT had condoned abnormal delay of 2102 days in filing appeal vide passing Misc. Order No. Defect/MO/42/2020- [CR] dated 07.12.2020 and admitted appeal file by the respondent. Since abnormal delay of 2109 days condoned without any genuine and justifiable reason the said order of the learned CESTAT has been challenged by the department before this Hon'ble Court and in this regard CEA No.02/2021 is filed, which is pending decision. 6. Subsequent to delay condonation, the learned CESTAT had decided appeal vide Final Order No.ST/A/51784/2021-CU [DB] dated 01.09.2021 observing that the definition of input was amended w.e.f. 01.04.2011 vide Notification 03/2011 dated 01.03.2011, wherein input services and inputs used for constru....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1.2022 the Respondent filed a refund claim for Rs. 7,15,09,643/- plus interest amount thereon. The Refund Sanctioning Authority vide OIO No. 339/AC/ST/Div-V/Indore/2021-22 dated 02.02.2022 sanctioned refund of Rs. 7,15,09,643/- to the respondent under Section 11 B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 as made applicable to the Service Tax vide Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 142 (8) (b) of the CGST Act, 2017. However, the Refund Sanctioning Authority held that no interest is liable to be paid, as the refund order has been issued within three months from the date of the refund application filed by the applicant. As per the provisions of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the learned CESTAT has erred in coming to the conclusion that the refund claimed by the respondent is governed under Section 11 B and 11 BB of Central Excise Act, 1944 (which shall be referred hereinafter as "Act, 1944"), whereas the aforesaid provisions governs such refund of duty amount. In fact the Tribunal failed to consider that such refund is governed under Section 11 B of the Act, 1944, since it pertained to refund of duty amount paid by the respondent in compliance of an order of Adjudicating Authority. So also the interest on delay payment of refund is governed by Section 11 B of the Act, 1944. He submits that learned Tribunal has misinterpreted the Apex Court ruling in case of Ma....