INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIAL GASES LIMITED Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Advocate for the appellants and learned DR for the respondent.

(2.) THE present appeal arises from order dated 30.03.2009 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Bhopal. By the impugned order, the appeal filed by the appellants against the order of the adjudicating authority has been dismissed. By the order dated 31.10.2002, the adjudicating authority had sanctioned interest to the extent of Rs. 1,23,447/ - as against the claim of amount of interest to the tune of Rs. 44,53.516/ - of the appellants. Being aggrieved by the said order rejecting the major part of the claim of interest the appellants filed the said appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) which came to be dismissed by the impugned order. Hence, the present appeal.

(3.) WHILE assailing the impugned order, the learned Advocate for the appellants submitted that the respondent could not have denied the interest on the amount which was withheld by the respondent and which undisputedly belonged to the appellants. Since the appellants were entitled for the benefit of exemption, the amount paid by the appellants towards the duty liability was clearly unauthorized and, therefore, the respondent ought to have paid the interest thereon for having retained the said amount without authority of law. On account of retention of the said amount, the appellants was restrained from using their own money for the relevant period and, therefore, the respondent ought to have paid due compensation for the same to the appellants in the form of interest. He placed reliance in the decision in the matter of Binjrajka Steel Tubes Limited v. CCE, Hyderabad -III, 2007 (218) ELT 563, Sandvik Asia Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax -I, Pune : 2006 (196) ELT 257 (S.C.), Sunder Steels Ltd. v. CC & CE (A), Hyderabad : 2009 (16) STR 228 (Tri. Bang.), Collector of Customs (Preventive) v. Kuljit Singh : 1993 (67) ELT 238 (Cal.), Assistant Commissioner of C. Ex. v. Calcutta Chemical Company Ltd. : 1992 (62) ELT 511 (Cal.), Jyoti Limited, Baroda v. Union of India and Anr. : 1979 (4) ELT 546) (Guj) in support of his contention for justification for the grant of interest on the amount which was lying with the respondent.