TMI Blog2009 (1) TMI 229X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d i.e. 23-11-1998. - 21 of 2006 - - - Dated:- 9-1-2009 - M.M. Kumar and H.S. Bhalla, JJ. Shri Jagmohan Bansal, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Munish Jolly, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : M.M. Kumar, J.].- This is assessee's appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 (for brevity, the Act') against the order dated 17-11-2005 (P-10) passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for brevity, 'the Tribunal') in Appeal No. C/592/203, The appellant has sought to raise the following substantial questions of law for determination by this Court:- "(i) Whether the market price determined by surveyor is cum-duty? (ii) Whether the appellant is entitled to interest on the delayed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l before the Tribunal in the year 1987, which was allowed by the Tribunal on 6-2-1996. The matter was again remanded to the Assistant Commissioner for deciding the claim within a period of four months (P4). On 26-5-1997, again directions were issued by the Tribunal to the Assistant Commissioner to decide the matter (P-5). On 26-6-1997, the Assistant Commissioner (Customs) for the third time again rejected the claim of the appellant on similar grounds on which it was earlier rejected. 5. The matter again went to the Tribunal and vide order dated 15-12-1997, the Tribunal directed the Assistant Commissioner to refund the amount of duty claimed by the appellant taking into account the value of the damaged goods as assessed by the Surveyor ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date of actual refund i.e. 23-11-1998. In support of his submission, learned counsel has placed reliance on a judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Sandvik Asia Ltd. v. Commissioner of income Tax-I, Pune, 2006 (196) E.L.T. 257 (S.C.) = 2007 (8) S.T.R. 193 (S.C.). 9. However, learned counsel for the respondents has placed reliance on a order of the Tribunal wherein reference has been made to the amendment made in Section 28(A) of the Act in the year 1995 and detailed reasons have been given for not granting interest to the appellant. 10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we find that the Tribunal should have awarded interest from the date of order i.e. 6-2-1996 till the actual date of refund i.e. 23-11 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
