M/S. Sesa Sterlite Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs &
- CitationAppeal No.105 & 106/2014-CE, dated 26/02/2014 passed by the Commissioner of Central Ex
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The liability to pay interest on a refund-linked duty demand that arose after a long delay is governed by the law of limitation, and where the demand is time-barred, no interest is payable on the amount so determined. The Tribunal, following the Delhi High Court's decision in Hindustan Insecticides Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, LTU, holds that the bar of limitation extinguishes any liability for interest arising from the interval between the apex court judgment and the Revenue's computation of the liability, and the appeal is allowed on that footing.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
[Arising out of Orders-in-Appeal No.105 & 106/2014-CE, dated 26/02/2014 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Salem ]
M/s. SESA STERLITE LTD. APPELLANT
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS & CENTRAL EXCISE, SALEM RESPONDENT
Appearance:
For the Appellant Shri Raghavan Ramabadran Adv.
For the Respondent Shri B. Balamurugan AC (AR)
CORAM:
Honble Shri D.N. Panda, Judicial Member
Date of hearing/decision 30-01-2015
FINAL ORDER NO. 40111 / 2015
Per D.N. Panda:
The genesis of the case shows that the duty liability was in dispute for long time which pertained to the period from 13.12.1971 to 20.01.2972 and 17.03.1972 to 01.05.1972. The litigation travelled upto apex court and liability against the appellant was determined thereat. There was no computation of the liability of the appellant by the Revenue. The computation was made on 27.11.2001, even though apex court decision came on 03.12.1996. Before the matter reached the Supreme Court, the appellant succeeded before the High Court. Upon such success, refund was granted to the appellant, agitating the matter by Revenue before the Supreme Court.
2. The controversy in this appeal arose is whether refund given to the appellant shall earn interest for Revenue and whether interest becomes payable from 1996 to 27.11.2001 by the appellant on the ultimate liability determined consequent upon Judgment of Apex Court. The Honble High Court of Delhi has settled this issue in the case of Hindustan Insecticides Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, LTU reported in 2013 TIOL 631-SC-DEL-CX wherein it was held that no liability of interest shall arise due to bar of limitation.
3. In view of the applicability of limitation provision, the appellant succeeds and that appeal is allowed.
4. Stay application is disposed in view of disposal of appeal as above.
(Dictated and pronounced in open court)
(D.N. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER
ksr 06-02-2015
DRAFT Remarks
I II III
Date of dictation 30.01.2015
Draft Order - Date of typing 03/02/2015 04/02/2015
Fair Order Typing 06.01.2015
Date of number and date of dispatch 09.02.20215
4 E/S/41530/2014 and E/41192/2014
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free