TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 1219X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid order from any higher Courts - applicants are entitled for refund within three months from 4-7-2002. Therefore, if there is any delay in payment of refund, interest is payable. From the above said Circular there is no requirement for filing an application for the refund claim - As it is only a ROM application wherein the findings of this Tribunal cannot be challenged by way of this ROM application. Therefore, the contention raised by the learned A.R. is totally mis-conceived, hence rejected - as per Board Circular dated 8-12-2004, the appellant are entitled for interest on pre-deposit after three months from the date of order passed by this Tribunal - Rectification denied. - C/1027/2008-Mum - Misc. Order No. M/12/2012-WZB/C-IV(SMB) - D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Section 11BB of the CEA with special reference to date of refund and explanation to these sections and held that interest is payable after 3 months from the date of application. In the present case, it is an admitted fact as given in para 2.3 of the impugned order of the Hon ble Tribunal that the refund application of the party was returned on 19-7-1999 itself and was not lying with the department since then. It is also an admitted fact as mentioned in para 2.8 of the impugned order that party submitted their refund application on 18-9-2007 and refund was granted to the party on 22-12-2007. In view of the order of Ranbaxy (supra) of Hon ble Apex Court, it is submitted that no interest was payable on refund. It is humbly submitted that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appeal was disposed of in favour of the appellant on 4-7-2002, no stay was granted to the Revenue against the said order. In that situation, the refund was to be made by the department within three months from 4-7-2002 i.e. the date of final order of the Tribunal. 4. The observation of the Board, in the above said Circular, was that the Hon ble Apex Court in its Order dated 21-9-2004 has decided the pre-deposit shall be returned within a period of three months of the disposal of the order passed by the appellate Tribunal/Court or other final authority. Therefore, it was decided that in terms of the Hon ble Supreme Court s order, such pre-deposit must be returned within three months from the date of the order passed by the appellate T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quirement to consider the same by this Tribunal. 6. The contentions of the learned AR are not acceptable as by way of this application, as the learned AR is seeking to argue the merits. As it is only a ROM application wherein the findings of this Tribunal cannot be challenged by way of this ROM application. Therefore, the contention raised by the learned A.R. is totally mis-conceived, hence rejected. 7. In view of the above observation that as per Board Circular dated 8-12-2004, the appellant are entitled for interest on pre-deposit after three months from the date of order passed by this Tribunal. I do not find any merits in the ROM application and the same dismissed. (Pronounced in Court on 2-3-2012) - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Custom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
