CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD REGIONAL BENCH - COURT NO.I (Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.NOI-EXCUS-002-APP-87-23-24 dated 26.05.2023 passed by Commissioner (Appeals) CGST & Central Excise, Noida) M/s L. G. Electronics India Pvt. Ltd., …..Appellant (Plot No.51, Udyog Vihar, Surajpur Kasna Road, Greater Noida U.P.)

VERSUS Principal Commissioner of Central Excise &

CGST, Gautam Buddh Nagar ….Respondent (3^rd Floor, Wegmans, Business Park, KP-III, Gautam Buddh Nagar-201306)

APPEARANCE Shri Atul Gupta, Advocate for the Appellant Shri A. K. Choudhary, Authorized Representative for the Respondent FINAL ORDER NO.- 70443/2025 DATE OF HEARING : 05.03.2025 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.07.2025 The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant assailing the Order-in-Appeal No.NOI-EXCUS-002-APP-87-23-24 dated 26.05.2023 passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) CGST & Central Excise, Noida, to the extent it is prejudicial to the interest of Appellant as it held that the Appellant is not entitled to any interest on the pre-deposit amount of Rs.47,82,819/-.

2. The facts of the case in brief are that the Appellant was engaged inter alia in the manufacture of Colour Televisions, CTVs Refrigerators, Air Conditioners and Washing Machines classifiable under Chapter 84 & 85 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, CORAM: HON’BLE MR. P.K. CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

2 CETA

Appellant cleared these finished goods on payment of appropriate excise duty or exports them under bond. The Appellant was also manufacturing chassis sub assembly of CTVs within their factory which is also known as Printed Circuit Board, PCB Apart from the manufacture of CTVs in its factory, the Appellant also sent the sub-assembly and various others parts of CTVs to their Original Equipment Manufacturers, OEM located all over the country. The Appellant cleared the sub-assemblies/parts of CTV sets to other manufacturers as well. The Appellant classified the sub-assemblies and parts of CTV cleared to the OEM under tariff heading 85.29 as parts of CTV and paid excise duty @ 16% based on sale price of such sub-assemblies and parts to OEM. In the light of the above factual matrix, an investigation was initiated and during the investigation, the Appellant undisputedly deposited the amount of Rs.47,82,819/- before the issuance of Show Cause Notice and the same was appropriated vide Order- in-Original dated 25.11.2004. The Appellant preferred appeal before the Tribunal against the Order-in-Original dated 25.11.2004. The Tribunal vide final order dated 07.08.2013 remanded the matter to the Adjudicating Authority. In the remand proceedings, the Commissioner, Central Excise, Noida-II vide Order-in-Original No.30-32/Commissioner/Noida-II/2015-16 dated 31.03.2016 again confirmed the demand. Being aggrieved, the Appellant preferred appeal before the Tribunal. In the said appeal the amount of Rs.47,82,819/- was forming part of the total pre-deposit of Rs.8,58,23,726/- which was 7.5% of the total demand in dispute. The Tribunal vide Final Order dated 18.08.2022 allowed the appeal. Pursuant to the Tribunal’s order the Appellant claimed refund vide letter dated 25.08.2022 submitting that since the appeals have been allowed vide Final Order No.70138-70140/2022 and thus the pre-deposit amount considered for filing of such appeals is required to be refunded. The refund of whole amount including of Rs.47,82,819/- has been granted as the same was considered as pre-deposit.

Further, interest on whole of the amount was granted except no interest was granted on amount of Rs.47,82,819/-. The Commissioner (Appeals) though has not disputed that such amount is toward pre-deposit, however, he wrongly relied on the proviso to Section 35FF, which came in force from 06.08.2014.

Hence, the present appeal before the Tribunal.

3. Heard both the sides and perused the appeal records.

4. I find that by this appeal the Appellant has challenged the denial of interest on the pre-deposit amount of R