TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1064X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de. Lower authorities are directed to pay interest to appellant after 3 months from the date of filing of refund claims by the appellant till the date of actual refund paid to appellant - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. C/30833/2016 - Final Order No.A/31934/2017 - Dated:- 29-11-2017 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member ( Judicial ) Shri S.C. Mohanty, Advocate for the Appellant Shri Arun Kumar, Dy.Commissioner/AR for the Respondent ORDER [ Order Per : Mr. M. V. Ravindran ] 1. This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. VIZ-CUSTM-000-APP-049-16-17, dated 30.08.2016. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. On perusal of records, it transpires that the issue is regarding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 416/2012, dated 14.06.2012, remanding the matter back to the adjudicating authority to decide the issue in accordance with the law. The adjudicating authority by an order dated 04.06.2013 accepted the contentions that cost of design and engineering charges should not be included in the assessable value and coming to such a conclusion, refund was sanctioned. By a letter dated 28.12.2013, appellant sought interest amount from the adjudicating authority and adjudicating authority vide letter dated 21.03.2014 declined to pay the interest only on the ground that interest on provisional assessments was introduced from 13.07.2006 whereas the bills of entries were assessed provisionally in the year 1985-86. Aggrieved by such an order, an appeal w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubmissions made by Ld. DR and the findings recorded by the first appellate authority to reject claim of interest after 3 months from 14.06.2012 is contrary to the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd (supra). Their Lordships, in the said case, have specifically in paragraphs 15 16, recorded as under: 15. In view of the above analysis, our answer to the question formulated in para (1) supra is that the liability of the revenue to pay interest under section 11BB of the Act commences from the date of expiry of three months from the date of receipt of application for refund under section 11B (1) of the Act and not on the expiry of the said period from the date on which order of refund is made. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y provision of law by the Supreme Court is the law of the land and the respondents are duty bound to respect and follow the same. When the Supreme Court way back on 21.10.2011 has, in the case of Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Union of India held that interest shall be payable on the expiry of a period of three months from the dte of receipt of the application under sub-section (1) of Section 11BB of the Act and not on the expiry of the said period from the date on which the order or refund is made, the respondents cannot be heard to contend otherwise. The approach of the respondents, therefore, borders on being contumacious. In the opinion of this Court, if the respondent authorities duty follow the decision of the Supreme Court and the juri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
