*Qualcomm India Private Limited Vs Union of India and others*
*Forum-Bombay High Court*
*Date-21st May 2021*
*Sub-Whether the writ petitioner was eligible to get interest on delayed refund in terms of Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act 1944 read with Section 83 of the Finance Act 1994*

The appellant was providing support services to its foreign affiliates and as these services were exempt from service tax , the appellant claimed refund of Rs 12.47 crores vide 19 applications towards the input services used in providing these services as per the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004. The petitioner having received the refunds beyond 3 months from the date of filing the application, claimed interest as per the law. The department claimed plea of unintentional delay due to the reorganisation and other issues. The court noted CBIC Circular dated 1.10.2002 wherein the officers were requested to grant the interest expeditiously as well as the decision of the Apex court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories limited Vs Union of India (2011) 10 SCC 292(SC) where the apex court had held that the liability of the revenue to pay interest under section 11BB of the Central Excise Act commences from the date of expiry of three months from the date of receipt of application for refund under section 11B(1) and not on the expiry of three months from the date on which order of refund is made. The court also noted decision of Bombay high court in the case of Shroff United Chemicals Limited Vs. Union of India, 2011 (24) STR 17 where it was held that once the requisite conditions have been fulfilled follows as a matter of law and is a mandate of the statute. On these facts the writ was allowed and department was directed to immediately grant the interest as per the law.

In income tax matters, the assessees are now receiving upto date interest with refunds. The indirect regime will hopefully be spruced up in near future so that the refunds are voluntarily issued with interest.

Ramesh Patodia
25-05-2021