Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Agc Realty Pvt Ltd vs Principal Commissioner, Cgst-Delhi ... on 14 October, 2022
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
NEW DELHI.
PRINCIPAL BENCH - COURT NO. II
Excise Appeal No. 51168 of 2022 (SM)
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 46/ST/DLH/2020 dated 03.11.2020 passed by the
Commissioner (Appeals-I), Central Excise, Delhi.).
M/s AGC Realty Pvt Ltd Appellant
403, 4th Floor, Sachdeva Corporate
Tower, 17, Karkadooma Community
Centre, Vikas Marg Extension,
Delhi 110092
VERSUS
Principal Commissioner, CGST- Respondent
Delhi East C.R. Building, IP Estate, East Delhi, New Delhi 110002 APPEARANCE:
Mr. Rakesh Chitkara, Advocate for the appellant Mr. Mahesh Bhardwaj, Authorised Representative for the respondent CORAM:
HON'BLE SHRI ANIL CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) FINAL ORDER : 50989 / 2022 DATE OF HEARING: 14.10.2022 DATE OF DECISION: 14.10.2022 ANIL CHOUDHARY:
Heard the parties.
2. The issue in this appeal is whether the appellant have been granted correct amount of interest for the correct period on the deposit made during the investigation, pursuant to being successful in appeal.
3. The brief facts are that the appellant is a builder engaged in construction of residential complex. In the course of investigation on 21/01/2014, the appellant deposited an amount of 25 lakhs on 24/01/2014 under protest. Thereafter, show cause notice dated 2 ST/51168/2022 10/06/2015 was issued and a demand of more than Rs. 25 lakhs was confirmed vide Order-in-Original dated 12/06/2018. Being aggrieved the appellant had preferred appeal before the Commissioners (appeals) who was pleased to allow the appeal vide Order-in-Appeal dated 12/03/2019. Thereafter, the appellant filed claim of refund for the said pre-deposit of Rs. 25 lakhs on 03/10/2019. Vide Order-in-Original dated 19/11/2019, the refund was granted of the principal amount, that so far as interest is concerned, the same was allowed only on Rs. 8,44,769/- (as the amount mandatory required for pre-deposit for filing appeal). The interest on balance amount was rejected. Further, interest was allowed for the period from date of filing appeal till the date of grant of refund.
4. Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who vide impugned order have been pleased to reject the appeal vide impugned order dated 03/11/2020. Revenue had also filed Cross Appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), on the ground that no interest was allowable to the appellant-assessee. The revenue appeal was also dismissed the Commissioner (appeals).
5. Assailing the impugned order, learned Counsel for the appellant states that interest is allowable on the deposit under Section 35FF of the Central Excise Act, to assessee on success in appeal. Further, the said section provides for grant of interest from the date of deposit till the date of refund. Learned Counsel also relies on several precedent orders of this Tribunal, inter alia on the ruling of the division bench in the case of Parle Agro Limited wherein, under similar circumstances, where the amount was deposited during investigation/audit, this 3 ST/51168/2022 Tribunal has allowed the interest from the date of deposit till the date of refund @12% P.A.
6. Opposing the appeal, learned AR relies on the impugned order, he further states that the notified date of interest under Section 35FF is 6%.
7. Having considered the rival contentions, following the ruling of the Division Bench in the case of Parle Agro Ltd. (Supra), I hold that the appellant is entitled to interest from the date of deposit till the date of refund @ 12% P.A. Adjudicating Authority is directed to grant the balance interest within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order stands modified in these terms. As the issue is related to Service Tax, Registry is directed to correct the appeal as Service Tax Appeal instead of Excise Appeal. Appeal allowed.
(Order dictated in the open court) (Anil Choudhary) Member (Judicial) sb