TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 424X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... J. REPRESENTED BY : Shri C. Shashikantha, Advocate, for the Appellant. Smt. Rukmini Menon, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Judgment per : Sabhahit, J.]. This Appeal is by the Revenue being aggrieved by the order of the Customs, Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter called as CESTAT) in CESTAT Final Order No. 1958/2006, dated 23-11-2006 [2007 (210) E.L.T. 403 (Tribunal)] wherein the Tribunal while setting aside the order passed by original authority and the appellate authority has held that the respondent is entitled to interest as per the Notification issued by the Government three months immediately after coming into force of the Amendment Act introducing Section 27A up-to 10-1-2001 when the refund was made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder was passed on 9-4-1999 and as the refund was made on 10-1-2001, in view of the provisions of Section 27(2) the Tribunal held that since in view of the provisions of Section 27A interest would be payable from three months after the amendment came into force and therefore the rejection of the claim for interest on the belated refund is not justified and held that the respondent is entitled to interest as per the Notification issued by the Government on the belated payment of refund amount immediately after three months from the date of the Presidential Assent and the Amendment Act, 1995, till 10-1-2001 that the claim of the respondent was refunded as per the order of the CESTAT dated 9-4-1999. Being aggrieved by the said order passed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sideration to the contentions urged by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and scrutinized the material on record. 5. The material on record would show that the fact the claim for refund of Rs. 2,46,606/- which had been disallowed by the original authority and the appellate authority has been set aside and the claim for refund was allowed by the CESTAT by order dated 9-4-1999. It is also not in dispute that though the refund order was passed on 9-4-1999, the refund has been made up-to 10-1-2001. It is clear from the order passed by the CESTAT dated 9-4-1999 that the appellant therein who is the respondent herein is entitled to all the consequential reliefs as per law. Section 27A has been introduced by the Amendment Act, 1995 wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
