Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (11) TMI 1324 - CESTAT MUMBAI

2015 (11) TMI 1324 - CESTAT MUMBAI - TMI - Denial of refund claim - Excess duty paid - Held that:- Though the Revenue has filed appeal against this Tribunal order dated 5/9/2013 but no stay has been granted by Honble Mumbai High Court. It is also observed that implementing the Tribunal order, Revenue has already sanctioned the refund therefore I do not understand why the consequential relief of the refund i.e. interest should not be given to the assessee. Even as per the CBEC Circular No. 967/0 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the principle of judicial discipline. I, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the impugned order; hence, the same is sustained - Decided against Revenue. - Appeal No. C/89783/14 & Application No. C/EH/93979/15 - Dated:- 3-8-2015 - Mr. Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial) For the Respondent : Shri D.K. Sinha, Asstt. Commissioner (A.R.) ORDER Per : Ramesh Nair The respondent filed early hearing application, however the appeal itself is listed in routine therefore early hearing application become infr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to import of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) facility being set up by M/s. Dabhol Power Company. In connection with the said dredging work, the appellant had imported a Dredging vessel named M.V. Vicotria Island vide Bill of Entry No. 1292 dated 10/1/2001 and paid Custom duty of ₹ 42,14,228/- on the entire quantity of bunkers of the said vessel comprising of 6,70,375 litres of Fuel Oil and 47,059 litres of Lube Oil vide Challan No. 608 and Cash No. 557 dated 16/3/2001. On completion of the dr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

mporter/respondent filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the order-in-original. Thereafter the respondent filed appeal before the CESTAT which was allowed with consequential relief. In order to Honour CESTAT order refund of ₹ 31,17,091/- was sanctioned vide order-in-original No. DIV/Dapoli/3/13-14 and paid on 1/1/2014. The respondent made request for grant of interest on the delayed sanction of refund claim. The adjudicating authority vide order-in-original dated 27/ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

-. Aggrieved by the said order the Revenue is before me. 3. Shri V. K. Sinha, Ld. Asstt. Commissioner (A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue submits that CESTAT order dated 5/9/2013 by which refund was allowed has been challenged before the Hon ble High Court of Mumbai and the same is pending. Therefore the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) should not have passed the impugned order till the disposal of the department s appeal by the Hon ble High court. He prays that the order may be set aside and th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version