TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 727X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of investigation, it is not the duty and it is only a deposit and Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 is not applicable to deposits made during investigations - unjust enrichment is not applicable nor it has been invoked by the Department. Interest on delayed refund - Held that: - the assessee is entitled to interest from the date of expiry of three months from the date of filing the application for refund till the refund is granted. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - C/1615/2011-SM - 22893/2017 - Dated:- 21-11-2017 - Shri SS Garg, Judicial Member Ms. Sandhya, Advocate - For the Appellant Shri Naveen Kushalappa, Dy. Commissioner (AR) - For the Respondent ORDER Per: SS GARG The present appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able in law as the same has been passed contrary to the provisions of the act as well as contrary to the binding judicial precedent on the same issue. She further submitted that the amount paid by the appellant during the course of investigation is merely a deposit and this payment does not amount to a duty and Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 will not apply to deposits. For this submission, she relied upon the following decisions:- i. CC, Bangalore Vs. Motorola India Pvt. Ltd. [2006(206) ELT 370 (Tri. Bang.)], affirmed by Karnataka High Court reported in 2008(221) ELT 489 (Kar.)] ii. CCE, Coimbatore Vs. Pricol Ltd. [2015(320) ELT 703 (Mad.)] iii. CCE, Mumbai-V Vs. Atul Industries [2004(168) ELT 353 (Tri. Mum.)] ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... India Pvt. Ltd. [2006(206) ELT 370 (Tri. Bang)], affirmed by Karnataka High Court reported in 2008(221) ELT 489 (Karo)] ii. Steel Products Ltd. Vs. CCE, Kolkata-II [2003(158) ELT 476 (Tri. Kolkata)] 5. On the other hand, the learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order and submitted that refund is time barred because the same has not been filed within the period prescribed under the law. He further submitted that the duty was not paid under protest and therefore the limitation will be applicable. He also submitted that the doctrine of unjust enrichment is also applicable in the present case. 6.1. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of material on record and various judgments relied up ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
