IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Vibhu Bakhru, Amit Mahajan, JJ.
Blackberry India Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
The Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise And CGST Division, Malaviya Nagar, New Delhi – Respondent
W.P.(C) 9364 of 2023
Decided On : 03-08-2023
Interest - Refund of Unutilised Cenvat Credit - Central Excise Act, 1944, Finance Act, 1994 - Section 11BB, Section 83
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a petition challenging the denial of interest on the amount of refund sanctioned under the Central Excise Act and the Finance Act. The petitioner claimed that the services provided by it constituted export of services and was entitled to refund of unutilised Cenvat Credit.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner was entitled to interest on the amount of refund as per Section 11BB of the Excise Act, and directed the Adjudicating Authority to process the petitioner's claim for interest.
Issues: The main issue was the denial of interest on the refund amount by the Adjudicating Authority, based on the date of application for refund and the interpretation of Section 11BB of the Excise Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the interest under Section 11BB of the Excise Act would be payable from the date immediately after the expiry of three months from the date of receipt of an application for refund, and that the Adjudicating Authority erred in considering the petitioner's letter as its application for refund.
Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the Adjudicating Authority was directed to process the petitioner's claim for interest under Section 11BB of the Excise Act read with Section 83 of the Finance Act.
JUDGMENT
Vibhu Bakhru, J.
1. The petitioner (Blackberry India Pvt. Ltd.) has filed the present petition impugning an order dated 04.05.2023 (hereafter `the impugned order') passed by the Adjudicating Authority to the extent that it denies the petitioner's claim for interest under Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereafter `the Excise Act') read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 (hereafter `the Finance Act'), on the amount of refund sanctioned.
2. In terms of the impugned order, the Adjudicating Authority has sanctioned the refund of unutilised Cenvat Credit as claimed by the petitioner, but has denied the interest on the said amount, on the ground that the refund has been sanctioned within a period of three months, as contemplated under Section 11BB of the Excise Act read with Section 83 of the Finance Act. The impugned order indicates that the Adjudicating Authority had considered the date of application for refund as 07.02.2023, instead of the dates on which the applications were first made.
3. At the material time, the petitioner was, inter alia, engaged in providing services to Blackberry Singapore Pte. Ltd., an overseas entity. The petitioner claimed that the services provided by it to Blackberry Singapore Pte. Ltd. constituted export of services in terms of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 and therefore, was entitled to refund of unutilised Cenvat Credit.
4. The petitioner made three separate applications for refund of unutilised credit for different tax periods. A tabular statement setting out the claims for refund of unutilised Cenvat Credit is set out below:
| Sl. No. | Period/Quarter | Refund amount | Date of filing (Offline) refunds |
| 1. | April - June, 2012 | 3,18,11,287 | 28.03.2013 |
| 2. | April - June, 2013 | 2,89,94,208 | 31.03.2014 |
| 3. | July - September, 2013 | 2,47,28,850 | 30.06.2014 |
| Total | 8,55,34,345 |
5. The above tabular statement was also noted by the Adjudicating Authority in the impugned order.
6. The aforesaid claims were not processed and the Adjudicating Authority issued a Show Cause Notice dated 22.01.2020, proposing to reject the petitioner's claim for refund on the ground that the place of provision of services was in India. According to the Adjudicating Authority, the petitioner had rendered the services in question as an intermediary. Thus, notwithstanding that the recipient of the services was located outside India, the place of service was in India. Thereafter, the Adjudicating Authority passed an Order-in-Original dated 31.08.2020 rejecting the petitioner's claim for refund on the aforesaid ground.
7. The petitioner appealed the Order-in-Original dated 31.08.2020 before the Appellate Authority [Commissioner (Appeals)]. The Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal by an Order-in-Appeal dated 19.08.2021, and upheld the Order-in- Original dated 31.08.2020.
8. Aggrieved by the said Order-in-Appeal, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned Custom, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereafter `the CESTAT'), which was allowed by a final order No. 51150/2022 dated 07.12.2022.
9. Notwithstanding that the petitioner had succeeded before the CESTAT, the petitioner's claim for refund was not processed immediately. The petitioner once again sent a letter dated 07.02.2023, seeking refund of the amount of Rs.8,55,34,345/- along with the interest under Section 11BB of the Excise Act.
10. In the meanwhile, the Revenue filed an appeal against the Order dated 07.12.2022 passed by the CESTAT before this Court (SERTA 7/2023 captioned Principal Commissioner, Central Excise and CGST-Delhi South v. Blackberry India Private Limited). The said appeal was dismissed by an order dated 12.07.2023.
11. However, prior to that, the Adjudicating Authority processed the petitioner's claim for refund and granted the same in terms of the impugned order.
12. The controversy, essentially relates to the petitioner's claim for interest on the amount of refund. The Adjudicating Authority has rejected the same on the ground that the pet
Section 11BB does not speak about or exempts any delay which is not intentional. The section does not distinguish delay which is intentional and delay which is unintentional. Once there is delay in p....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that interest on delayed refunds is a statutory liability under Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and becomes payable if the duty order....
The liability of the revenue to pay interest under section 11-BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944, commences from the date of expiry of three months from the date of receipt of the application for ref....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.