High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCEA/7/2018allowed

M/S Bata India Ltd. v. Commissioner Central Excise, Delhi-Iv

2023-04-25Ms. Justice Ritu Bahri,Mrs. Justice Manisha Batra8 pages

!"!#$%&'

()"

* +,,

2 -3!.

0 $ (0/0!# 04!#5326

#(" 7-07839 704!3726

0 (0#"37/ 3,0 24 #!04

#!#5 7#"

-2

#(0

"39 026

0 ::::

7 30!2 3!"

-27#

!#'%

2;&&2

#!- !#"

!# -0

=## > /"21 !"

#4 06!

1,,

-=0"30

@ -A>2

5!# - # 32 #!5 032!#,,

-)%B%;)' <0!

()"

* !"0 5!"

#!" #5

0 --!#57# 0 00!

/B&'; #B&';; !0"

4 3 7-

- 00! 2;% 3

2 -3!26!

0)#

;;3 #!0/

# ";22B&) #!/,"

? "222)#

3 !0 0C " 3 #5 -3 -2 6!

%;;=## >2C3!- !","!#5

0!/

!#!# ! 2!0

"22)7#

!#'% *

0#2

0!<7# -26!

B%=## '>2

# "

!0 # /

<? 0 ?

02 !- !/#;;=## &>

!#'%

3 0!""7

"3C #

B=## %>,0,"!#5 0

;;#

#!-

1,!0?# ?

B%=## '>3

!- ,-? "3C # #'=## B>3 !/C

D7!

!#5 ?6!

&=## >,,

- !#"

!0 02!- <?

2C -"!"/!""

=## ;>, 0=,,

-"># 507#-!/!

,0 "7 ? -!/!

!# 7#

2;&&C7- ,,-? 3

3 #5 !0 0<?!-!#5

-< -2 C3! 3C

7#,0 "22) # --C!#5507#$ =!>

!#'%!"#

7 ?<7 #-? ,"!

0 !-!#5 0!53

-E =!!>

!# "# ,,-?

!#'%

!"!# 5!6 #<? #A<- /< ?!53

!;;B=>*F

' C 02

"3C

# "!""7 C!

3!#

!, 7# !/ 550!

!0 02 "!-

- *

0# 7#"

-0 !0 7-

B;&!""7 ?2C3! 30

0 7# ,0 3 ! !0 70,06!

!/ ##

7#- "" !""

?<? "7, 0!0 ", 3!" !0 702 !2 #

/,-

- !#"

0 0

0=>0 0 42 #!#

- *

0# 7#"

-0 "70

0!<7# - 3 " 0 -!

7,# !"!# 5!6 # !# "

#$# !% & ' (!B=&>*'''=0! ->2C3! 3!"#

-A"0 0C

&%' 7# "50

3!#

3"#&'3

2!#

8!#5 !

,0 # 3!"

-3

0?,06!"!#

-!#5 C!

30 7#,0 "24

!#C7- ,,-?

D75/ !# )(! %=;>*%=4 >2 C3 !##A<- 47,0

-!#5C!

G7 !#,0

H!" < 50

2C3! 3!"

" 0!< 7#

!#0

!# <6 ! !"!##A<- 47,0

#--C <?

3!" !##*+#$ + ((

#!B='&> *;=I> #$#

((

#!%

& ='>*'%=I> *

0# 7#"

-0 "70

/ -!

"0 - !/!#50 7#3

#"!/,-!!

!0 7-

2C3 !#!

#,06!

#2 "!/,-

0"#2C33

"7 3 20 G7 !#5

70#

J 01 ,? 0!#

-0

0 0 #"

G7 C3! 32 /

70#

J 01 ,? #!#0/ B2C!--< "7! !

0 ,70,"

, 7#<? /,

0 *

0# 7#"

-0 2# 03 #23

C3!- !"/!""!#5

-050

#,0 D75/ !#" #$#, ="7,0 >23

0!53 -?

" 2<? -

02-

0# 7#"

-0 " , 07"

- D75/ !#" #$# , ="7,0 > "3C"

!#2 , !#

C " < !#5

C3 7#<

7 #!

3!# 0!

3"C3 #!

7 #<

3"2

"# - !/

#?!#

" -

!# -0

B%=## '> #3

70# C!

3!#

3"! <?B2

7-# !/

# 3!"< 80,2 !

7-3

- 0" #$# , ="7,0 >7 2!# 3!" "22)2 ",0 2C

,70"7

%;;3!"

!# -0 0C #B%=## '>3

"-?!#5C!

0/;; !--3

"<7# --C !/C!

3!#

3"0/B% ,,-!

!#00 7#C "!- #;;=## &>#"

--C!#5 7#2C3! 3<

7 "3C # "!""7

#B=## %>,0,"!#5 0

7# !/#

#!-

1,!0?# ?

00/

, ""!#5!# -0

B% !# --?2

7# "22) C !/!#

<?0 00!#5 !"!#5!6 #!#"

#$#, ="7,0 > "30 G7 !#0 #"!

!#!#

-!"2#

0!<7# -3 0 "22)2!"

# ?, 7# 3!" ",

# #"!

3!" !# #* +#$ +, ="7,0 >#

!#00 7#C

#% "/ ! "B2&&2)C 7#

!# /# 3 #7 0?2 ;2 C3

" 0 !#!#5

"22BB)C 7# 3,0!-2;

!0 70!""7 6 0#/ #!

#2C3! 3 ,06!

0/ -

!#00 7#C "# G7!0 "!/,- -

0/ 0"#!""7! !

3 ,? 02# "!" C3! 32 7#<

7 2C3! 3 #< #"!

? 0 !/4!#

!#2!#

#%2

H!#

##7/0

3" !-- 7#C "50

0, ""!#5

B 0 0<? -#%3 !53 9 2!# +$# *#& +

! ='%'>* ;=9 0>C /!#!#5 2C3

"-!

, ?

# 1,!0?

3"0/

, ,,

- "3

!# C " "7</!

2 !0 70"

&!""7 !#0 ",

7#)0

70# "# 0!

"7</!""!#

!##,

#"& #% !D75/ 2!

"<"

"7# 0$

14. Now, the sole question remains to be considered is what is the nature of interest that the petitioner is entitled to get. As discussed above in the judgment Commissioner of Central Excise v. ITC (supra), the Apex Court confined the interest to 12% and further held that any judgment/decision of any High Court taking contrary view, will be no longer good law. The said judgment is rendered, in my considered opinion under similar circumstances. So also in Kuil Fire Works Industries v. Collector of Central of Excise [1997 (95) ELT 3 ( SC), the pre-deposit made by the assessee was directed to be returned to him with 12% interest. I have also come across the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in Madura Coats Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of C. Ex., Kolkata - IV [2012 (285) E.L.T. 188 (Cal.)

, wherein the peremptory directions of the Apex Court in the judgment of ITC Ltd. (supra) was considered and ordered 12 % interest, and further held that when the High Court directed the respondents to pay interest to the appellant in terms of the circular dated 08.12.

Central Excise v. ITC Ltd, which was the rate quantified by the Supreme Court in the absence of any statutory provisions in the Act in question. Even though various other judgments of various High Courts and the various Tribunals was brought to my notice awarding 15% interest, in view of the directions contained in the judgment of the Apex Court in Commissioner of Central Excise v. ITC Ltd (supra) rate of interest is to be confined to 12%. I am also bound to follow the same. Therefore the interest that is liable to be paid by the respondents as per the directions of this Court in Ext.P12 judgment is fixed at 12% per annum.

15. Taking note of the compendious circumstances and reckoning the law, there will be a direction to the respondents to pay interest to the petitioner at 12% from the date of expiry of three months from 18.11.2002, to the amount of refund already made, within a month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after adjusting any interest paid. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly."

##C< /

!0 7-

B;& !""7 6 0#/ #!

2(!#!"

0?!# =

#7 >2

- 0 1 !"

I /"2 C -3!2 C3 <?

,0 00 7#3

# - 0!!

"7# 0$ K "!/,- -

0"#2C33

"7 3 20 G7 !#500

70# !

J 01 ,? 0!#

-0 40 0 #"

G7 C3! 3

70#

J 01 ,?

7/ 6!

# !#5 , "7 3

D70!"!

!# ""!"

) ,7 ?

#4 06!

""!"

) ,7 ? 0 /"2

?< 2C7-"7!

00 7#

3!#

", !!

!#'%

2;&&04

!#; /"

2;%"37-< / !#

" !-!

/- ""6 0!!

!/ ,0 ""!#5 !/"/

670 ,,

7 ?F # 2"!#

!#'%

"!/,-

!# 7-<

0 - !/!#5 7#C G7!0 <

70#

3!#

30 ",

D75/ #*+#$ + # -+$# *#& +,

"="7,0 >3 0!!

!"-!

/ !#

1,!0?

3"0/

7#< / # -"2

1,!0?

3"2

7 C 757"

2 #6!

C <6 !" 7""!#2 !"3

H, ##7/0 0!

/# 3" !-- 7#C "50

0, ""!#5 0<? #B%=## '>

#" 0!#5-? = > =(4 > %&'

$ ") $ ")