TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 944X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the claim as eventually, the principal amount was due and recoverable. That sum has been already remitted. In other words, the Petitioners have received a sum of ₹ 41,01,467/. The balance claim that remains is of interest on this sum. If the statute provides that in the event, amount is not paid within a specified time, then, the Revenue will have to pay interest, unless and until, the Revenue was able to obtain any preventive or prohibitory order and direction. It cannot refuse to release the sum in favour of the Petitioners. The Revenue could have released the sum without prejudice to its rights and contentions and subject to the pending proceedings in this Court and equally the Tribunal. The Rule is made absolute in terms of pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h July, 1998 was issued to the Petitioners which was adjudicated by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai V, who passed an order on 6th January, 2000. He confirmed the demand of ₹ 41,01,467/and imposed equal penalty. The Tribunal quashed and set aside this order on 12th March, 2004 essentially on the ground of limitation. It also set aside the penalty. However, on 31st August, 2004, the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise rejected the application for refund made by the Petitioners pursuant to the Tribunal's order as premature. The Commissioner of Central Excise made an order on 26th May, 2005 rejecting an Appeal of the Petitioners challenging this order of the Deputy Commissioner. The matter was carried by the Petitioners t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as the same involves substantial questions of law. It is, therefore, submitted that the order passed by the Tribunal sanctioning the refund is now at large before this Court. Secondly, against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 12th August, 2014 as well, the Tribunal has been approached by the Revenue and the Revenue's Appeal is pending. In such circumstances, this Court should not grant any relief is the submission of Mr. Rao based on the contents of this affidavit. 6] Mr. Prakash Shah, learned counsel, appearing for the Petitioners, on the other hand, would urge that throughout, namely, before this Court or before the Tribunal there are no prohibitory or preventive orders. The Respondents have not been able to obtain any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was able to obtain any preventive or prohibitory order and direction. It cannot refuse to release the sum in favour of the Petitioners. The Revenue could have released the sum without prejudice to its rights and contentions and subject to the pending proceedings in this Court and equally the Tribunal. 8] In the light of the above position emerging from the record, we are of the opinion that the rights and equities can be balanced with the following order and direction; (a) The Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) with the direction to the Respondents to pay the sum of interest as quantified in terms of the earlier orders and direction and the provisions of law; (b) The amount as computed and quantified shall be relea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
