TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 384X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n isolation of the Customs Act, 1962. If there is delay in payment of any refund claim, the 2nd respondent is duty bound to pay the interest in terms of Section 27A of the Customs Act - At the same time, since the decision of this Court rendered in KSJ Metals Impex (P) Ltd [ 2013 (6) TMI 148 - MADRAS HIGH COURT ] has been stayed I am unable to give any relief to the petitioner at this stage. The respondent shall pass appropriate orders as and when the division Bench dispose KSJ Metals Impex (P) Ltd case, unless there is an earlier decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the very same subject - Petition disposed off. - W.P.Nos.36365 to 36367 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 18-12-2019 - MR. C. SARAVANAN J. For Petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e respondent for interest for delayed payment of refund under Section 27 A of the Customs Act, 1962. 5. Since the petitioner did not receive any favourable order from the respondent, the petitioner preferred W.P.Nos.30592 to 30594 of 2016 before this Court. Under the circumstances, the said writ petitions were disposed by an order dated 1.9.2006. The respondent was directed to pass a speaking order. Pursuant to the said order, the impugned orders have been passed rejecting the claim of the petitioner for interest on delayed payment of the Special Additional Duty of Customs refundable under Notification No. 102 of 2007- Customs dated 14.9.2007. The operative portion of the impugned order reads as under:- 8. The claim w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi by the claimed is not acceptable and sustainable. 11. Further, the legislative intent is to grant exemption by way of 4% Additional Duty of Customs and there is no provision in the aforesaid notification to grant interest or to apply the provisions of Sections 27 or 27A of the Customs Act, 1962. I find the Notification No.102/2007-Cus dated 14.09.2007 itself prescribed the manner of filing of a refund claim with inbuilt time limit, conditions and nowhere does the notification takes recourse to the provisions of Section 27 and 27A of the Customs Act, 1962. In the absence of specific provision for payment of interest being applicable under the said notification, the payment of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by itself does not mean the respondent can delay payment of interest. The learned counsel submits that stay merely suspends the order and operates qua the partly concerned and the reasoning therein and the ratio therein still had persuasive value. 8. The learned counsel relied on the decision of the Delhi High Court reported in the case of Principal Commissioner of Customs v. Riso India Pvt.Ltd. 2016 (333) ELT 33 (Del.) wherein the Division Bench had taken cognizance of the stay granted by the Division Bench in KSJ Metals Impex (P) Ltd (cited supra) and has still considered the provisions of law independently in the context of same notification under question and allowed the claim for interest and held that it cannot be deni ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Customs Act, 1962. The exemption notification issued under Section 25A merely relaxes the condition from levy of tax. Refund of Duty is stipulated therein subject to the conditions. Procedure for refund of Duty is governed by Section in 27 and the payment of interest on delayed payment thereon under Section 27A of the Customs Act. The notification cannot be read in isolation of the Customs Act, 1962. 15. If there is delay in payment of any refund claim, the 2nd respondent is duty bound to pay the interest in terms of Section 27A of the Customs Act. At the same time, since the decision of this Court rendered in KSJ Metals Impex (P) Ltd (cited supra) has been stayed I am unable to give any relief to the petitioner at this stage. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
