News Update

PM-STIAC discusses accelerating Industry-Academia Partnership for Research and InnovationIndia, Singapore hold dialogue over cyber policy44 bids received under 10th Round of Commercial Coal Mine AuctionsCops arrest former Dy PM of Nepal in cooperative fraud casePuri highlights India's Petrochemical potential at India Chem 2024UN reports record high cocaine production in ColombiaMinister unveils 'Aviation Park' showcasing India's Aviation HeritageED finds PFI wanted to start Islamic movement in IndiaBlocking Credit - Rule 86ASEBI says investors can use 3-in-1 accounts to apply online for securitiesI-T- Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) need not be imposed when assessee moved an adjournment application & later complied with notice u/s 142(1): ITAT4 Kanwariyas killed as vehicle runs over them in Banka, BiharI-T- Accounting principles do not prescribe maintaining of a day-to-day stock register, and the books of accounts cannot be rejected on this basis alone: ITATUN food looted and diverted to army in EthiopiaCus - Alleged breach of conditions for operating public bonded warehouse; CESTAT rightly rejected allegations, having found no evidence of any such breach: HCUS budget deficit surges beyond USD 1.8 trillionST - Onus for proving admissibility of Cenvat Credit rests with service provider under Rule 9(6) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004: CESTATIf China goes into Taiwan, Trump promises to impose additional tariffsRussians love Indian films; Putin lauds BollywoodCus - Classification of goods is to be determined in accordance with Customs Tariff Act & General Interpretative Rules; Country-of-Origin Certificate may offer some guidance, but cannot solely dictate classification: CESTATCus - Benefit of such Country-of-Origin certificates cannot be denied if all relevant conditions are met under the applicable Customs Tariff rules: CESTATCuban power grid collapses; Country plunges into darknessCus - As per trite law, merely claiming a classification or exemption does not constitute mis-declaration or suppression - any misclassification does not equate to willful intent to evade duty: CESTATKarnataka mulling over 2% fee on aggregator platforms to bankroll gig worker welfare fundCus - Extended limitation cannot be invoked in case of assessee who is a regular importer with a consistent classification approach: CESTAT
 
ST - Refund matured only as result of Tribunal's order, therefore, there is no question of granting interest for period prior to date of order: CESTAT

 

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, JUNE 11, 2018: THE appellant deposited the adjudged dues of duty, interest and 25% penalty confirmed by order-in-original dated 30.6.2011. In appeal before Tribunal they succeeded and, therefore, filed a refund claim in respect of the amount deposited.

Refund was granted but without any interest.

Aggrieved against denial of interest, an Appeal was filed but the Commissioner(A) did not rule in their favour.

The matter is now in the CESTAT.

The appellant submitted that they are entitled for interest right from the date of deposit of the amount in view of the apex court decision in ONGC Ltd. - 2007-TIOL-138-SC-CUS.

The AR submitted that the refund became mature only after the demand order was set aside by the Tribunal and since the refund was sanctioned within three months from the date of filing application u/s 11B, no interest is payable. Reliance is placed on the decisions in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. - 2011-TIOL-105-SC-CX, Indian Thermoplastics (P) Ltd. - 2003-TIOL-234-CESTAT-DEL-LB.

The Bench considered the submissions and inter alia observed –

+ On plain reading of Section 11BB, the interest is payable from three months from the date of application. Except the provision of Section 11BB, there is no provision by which the interest can be granted from the date of deposit.

+ This Tribunal, being a creature under the statute of Central Excise Act, cannot go beyond the statutory provision made under that Act. Therefore, the interest is not payable from the date of deposit, but it is payable only after three months of filing the application.

After distinguishing the case law(s) cited by the appellant, the CESTAT adverted to the provision of Section 11B(5)(B)(ec) of the CEA, 1944 defining 'relevant date' which reads:-

"(ec) in case where the duty becomes refundable as a consequence of judgment, decree, order or direction of appellate authority, Appellate Tribunal or any court, the date of such judgment, decree, order or direction."

Thereafter, the Tribunal observed -

+ The 'relevant date' means in case where the duty becomes refundable as a consequence of judgment, decree, order or direction of appellate authority, Appellate Tribunal or any court, the date of such judgment, decree, order or direction.

+ As per the above provision, the refund becomes matured only as a consequence of the Appellate Tribunal's order. When the refund itself is not matured prior to the date of Appellate Tribunal's order, there is no question of interest for the period prior to the date of order.

Holding that the appeal does not survive, the same was dismissed.


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri Samrat Choudhary, Hon’ble Deputy CM & FM of State of Bihar, delivering inaugural speech at TIOL Tax Congress 2024.



Justice A K Patnaik, Mentor to Hon'ble Jury for TIOL Awards 2024, addressing the gathering at the event.