M/S. Brahmaputra Carbon LTD. And Anr. vs. The Union Of INDIA And 3 Ors

Held

The Court held that the petitioners are entitled to interest on their refunds. This decision is based on the established precedent set by the Division Bench of the same High Court in *Amalgamated Plantation Private Limited -Vs- Union of India*. The Court acknowledged the Revenue's submission regarding the pending SLP before the Supreme Court and the condition of furnishing an undertaking for reimbursement. Following the approach adopted in the *Panparag India Limited* case, the Court directed the respondent authorities to disburse the interest amount to the petitioners within two months from the date of furnishing a certified copy of the order. This disbursement is contingent upon the petitioners providing an undertaking to reimburse the interest amount if the Revenue succeeds in SLP No. 016322/2018 before the Supreme Court. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

Facts

The petitioners, M/s. Brahmaputra Carbon Ltd. and Sanjib Kumar Baruah, filed two writ petitions (WP(C)/3565/2016 and WP(C)/3572/2016) before the Gauhati High Court. The core issue in both petitions was whether the petitioners were entitled to interest on refunds under Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Revenue authorities are the respondents. The procedural history indicates that the question of law regarding interest on refunds under Section 11BB had been settled by a Division Bench of the same High Court in a previous case. The Revenue had also preferred an appeal before the Supreme Court against a similar order granting interest on delayed refunds.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioners are entitled to interest on refunds under Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944, considering the existing High Court precedent. Petitioner's Argument: The petitioners contended that they are entitled to interest on refunds under Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944, relying on the Division Bench judgment in *Amalgamated Plantation Private Limited -Vs- Union of India* (2013 (2) GLT 413). This precedent held that Section 11BB does not exclude claims for refunds made under a specific notification and that petitioners were entitled to interest on refunded excise duty. Revenue's Argument: The Revenue, represented by GST counsel, drew attention to a subsequent Division Bench order in *Union of India –Vs- Panparag India Limited* (Writ Appeal No. 102/2022). In this case, the Revenue had an appeal pending before the Supreme Court (SLP No. 016322/2018) and was directed to pay interest on delayed refunds, subject to the respondent furnishing an undertaking to reimburse the amount if the Revenue succeeded in the Supreme Court.