TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 477
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bjected to by the department, by way of show cause notices proposing recovery of the said Cenvat credit. The appellant vide debit entry reversed the Cenvat credit post issuance of the show cause notice to them. The appellant contested the said show cause notices in adjudication proceedings. The learned adjudicating authority however directed appropriation of the amount paid against the said demands confirmed. In appellate proceedings before the Tribunal, the appeal filed by the appellant was however rejected and subsequently the matter litigated before the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur, whereby the Hon'ble High Court ruled as under: "10. Be that it may, since the controversy raised in these appeals has been set at rest by the Division bench of this Court by judgment passed in Hindustan Zinc Ltd.'s case (supra), while answering the question framed in these appeals in favour of the assessee, we deem it appropriate to allow these appeals in terms of the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Hindustan Zinc Ltd.'s case (supra)." 4. In view of the above, the appellants were refunded the amount paid by them, as also noted in the orders passed by the learned ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er protest and, therefore, the principles of unjust enrichment would not apply. In view of the catena of decisions, available on this issue, this Court answers the first substantial question of law against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee." 7. The learned Advocate therefore submits that the amount deposited by them was in the nature of pre-deposit and which was refundable to them along with interest. He therefore submits that they have a strong case on merits of the matter seeking payment of interest from the department. The learned Advocate in support of his proposition that the amount deposited by him was in the nature of revenue deposit and deemed to have been paid under protest, also relied upon the following judgments: (i) CESTAT order in Parle Agro Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE Noida - 2018 (360) ELT 1005 (Tri-All) (ii) Indore Treasure Market City Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner, CGST Indore, Service Tax Appeal No. 55434 of 2023 (iii) JK Cement Works Vs. Commissioner of CGST Udaipur, CESTAT Final Order No. 51052/2021 dated 02.03.2021 (iv) Rajasthan HC Order dated 27.10.2021 in DB Central Excise Appeal No.1/2021 (v) Punjab & Haryana HC CCE & ST Panchkula Vs. Riba Texti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in the impugned appeals, there was no specific order for sanctioning of interest as was so directed in the case of Parle Agro Pvt. Ltd. (supra), wherein the Tribunal in Para 30 had noted as under: "In the present case, the provisions of section 11B of the Excise Act would not be applicable. This is for the reason that the appellant was not claiming refund of duty. The applicant, as noticed above, had claimed refund of the revenue deposit. Such a finding has also been clearly recorded by the Tribunal in the order dated 31.01.2017, which order has attained finality" and the Tribunal had specifically ordered refund along with appropriate interest. Moreover, the learned Departmental Representative added that in all the cases the amount of Cenvat credit was debited well after issuance of show cause notice and therefore it cannot be construed that the impugned amount was deposited during the course of investigation in the matter. Learned Departmental Representative had further relied upon the following case laws: S. No. Case Law referred Page Nos./Paras Relevant observations 1. MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LTD. Vs UNION OF INDIA 1997 (89) E.L.T. 247 (S.C.) Nine Judges Bench Para 99(i)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ree, order or direction of the Appellate Tribunal or any court or in any other provision of this Act or the rules made thereunder or in any law for the time being in force, no refund shall be made except as provided in Section 11B of CEA 1944. The Hon'ble Court went on to repeat that so long as Section 11B is constitutionally valid, it has to be followed and given effect to. 5. M/s. Dinesh Tobacco Industries Vs. Commissioner, Jodhpur [Excise Appeal No. 50455-50456/2019 Final Order No. 57990- 57991/2024; Date of Decision 09.08.2024] Para-8 (page-28) The issue is no longer res integra and has been considered and settled by the two High Courts. In the case of C. Padmini Chinnadurai (supra), the Division Bench rejected the contention of the appellant that since it is "pre-deposit" and not "central excise duty", therefore, the notification no.67/2023 would not apply, observing as under:- "16. Unless it has been established that "Pre-Deposit" is not with reference to the "Central Excise Duty", but "Pre-Deposit" can be made in respect of other payment also, the argument advanced by the learned Standing Counsel has to be accepted. That is to say even if the term "Pre-Deposit" is u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....;ble High Court of Delhi have ordered for payment of interest @6% on refund amount after Hon'ble CESTAT granted interest @12%. 11. I note that the refund order in the present appeals clearly mention that the claimant is entitled to refund under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In respect of such refund claims, Section 11BB for interest on delayed refunds is applicable which reads as under: "Section 11BB (Interest on delayed refunds) says - If any duty ordered to be refunded under sub-section (2) of Section 11-B to any applicant is not refunded within three months from the date of receipt of application under sub-section (1) of that section, there shall be paid to that applicant interest at such rate, not before five per cent and not exceeding thirty per cent per annum as is for the time being fixed by the Central Government, by notification in Official Gazette, on such duty from the date immediately after the expiry of three months from the date of receipt of such application till the date of refund of such duty." 12. Having heard both the sides and perused the case records, at the outset, it may be pointed out that the various case laws relied upon by the lear....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appeal under Section 35-E of the Central Excise Act unless a demand notice was issued under Section 11A is correct in law when the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Asian Paints (India) Ltd. - Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai, reported in 2002 (142) ELT 522 had held to the effect that an order issued under Section 35-E would be equally sustainable in law for recovering dues of excise duty?" 15. As for the case of Parle Agro Pvt. Ltd. referred (supra), it is noted that the appellant had deposited the said amount from PLA, during the course of pendency of investigations and with a specific endorsement that the same was being paid under protest as noted in Para 5 of the said order. 16. In the case of Indore Treasure Market City Pvt. Ltd. (supra) as relied upon by the appellant, it is observed that in the said case, the amount for which the refund was sought was deposited by the appellant during the pendency of the investigations and paid under protest and specifically noted to have been paid under protest. It was in such circumstances, this Tribunal had allowed the interest on the amount of refund sanctioned in the said matter. In so far as the appellant's own case....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ut reversal of inadmissible amounts and their appropriation towards the duty short paid. The Central Excise Act is concerned with the payment of interest under the following four circumstances : (i) Delayed payment of duty under Section 11AA, (ii) Delayed payment of refund under Section 11B(2) (iii) Amount collected in excess of duty paid under Section 11DD of Central Excise Act. (iv) Delayed refund of amount deposited under Section 35F (in terms of Section 35FF of Central Excise Act). There is no provision in the Central Excise Act that deals with payment of interest on revenue deposits. Thus the only provision in the Act about refund and the interest thereupon relate to Section 11, which concerns the recovery of duties not levied or not paid or short levied or short paid or erroneously refunded, or the amount of pre deposit to be made while challenging the order at appellate stage, which may be refunded depending upon the circumstances and facts of the case the appellate authority (along with the interest at such rates as fixed by the Central Government). 19. Since the amount in question was not deposited for the purposes of filing appeal nor it is proved to have been dep....