TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 530X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce the day of the deposit. Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Sandvik Asia Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-I 2006 (1) TMI 55 - SUPREME COURT , has held the assessee to be entitled to claim interest from the date of payment of initial amount till the date of its refund. Relying upon these decisions, as discussed above, I hold that the appellant herein is entitled to claim the interest on three of the amounts as have already been refunded to him. The interest shall accrue from the date of the payment of the said amount with the department. Keeping in view of this tribunal in the case of M/s S. S. Dyes Chemicals 2015 (11) TMI 1393 - CESTAT MUMBAI and the fact that the amount is lying deposited with the department since the Year 2013, I deem it to be a fit case for the interest to be awarded to the appellant on three of the amounts, already refunded , at the rate of 12% per annum to be calculated from the date of payment of the said amount till the disbursement thereof. Thus, the order is hereby is modified to the extent as mentioned. The appeals stands accordingly disposed off. - DR. RACHNA GUPTA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri N.K. Sharma, Advocate for the Appellant Shri Rohit Issar, Au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ansaction value of imports declared by the appellant was enhanced by the assessing officer arbitrarily without any basis. The appellant had deposited the requisite differential Duty of Customs. This value enhancement was subsequently set aside by the Learned Commissioner (Appeals). The appellant submits that rejection of the value enhanced by the Assessing Officer demonstrates that the appellant was not required to make payment of the amounts of Rs.5,04,915/-, Rs.4,14,316/- and Rs.10,23,522/- at the time of imports made from 01.05.2013 to 14.07.2013. Hence these amounts retained by the Customs during all these years i.e. with effect from payment of the amount by appellant till the said demand got set aside i.e. from 2013 to 2019 should be treated as revenue deposit with the exchequer. The amounts deposited were ultimately refunded to the appellant vide Orders dated 27.11.2019, 27.02.2019 and 27.02.2019 respectively, but without awarding interest on the said amount despite that refund attracts payment of interest from the date of deposit. Resultantly, the appellant is entitled for interest on the said amount from the date of deposit till the refund of the said amount. The Order-in-A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e matter is with respect to the duty of excise and deals with the provision relating to interest under Excise Act but it categorically holds that there is no provision in the Excise Act which deals with the refund of revenue deposit and so the rate of interest has not been prescribed for the deposit which is required to be refunded. Same is true even for the Customs Act. The Hon ble Apex Court in its decision in SLP titled as Union of India Vs. Suvidhe Ltd. in which the decision of Hon ble Bombay High Court in Suvidhe Ltd. Vs. Union of India reported as 1996 (82) ELT 177, has held that in case of deposits which are not in the form of duty, the provisions dealing with interest on the refund of duty will not be applicable. As already observed above, the amount in question in the present case is no more remains to be an amount of customs duty nor it is an amount of pre-deposit, the amount is merely a deposit with Revenue which Revenue has no authority to retain. The appellant being the owner of the said amount. As per Article 300A of the Constitution of India also, no person shall be deprived of his property, save by authority of law. Once the self assessed value of the appellant has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... et out above in the instant case for the assessment year 1978-79, it has been deprived of an amount of 40 lakhs for no fault of its own and exclusively because of the admittedly unlawful actions of the Income Tax Department for periods ranging up to 17 years without any compensation whatsoever from the Department. Such actions and consequences, in our opinion, seriously affected the administration of justice and the rule of law. COMPENSATION: 46. The word Compensation has been defined in P. Ramanatha Aiyar s Advanced Law Lexicon 3rd Edition 2005 page 918 as follows: An act which a Court orders to be done, or money which a Court orders to be paid, by a person whose acts or omissions have caused loss or injury to another in order that thereby the person damnified may receive equal value for his loss, or be made whole in respect of his injury, the consideration or price of a privilege purchased; some thing given or obtained as an equivalent; the rendering of an equivalent in value or amount; an equivalent given for property taken or for an injury done to another; the giving back an equivalent in either money which is but the measure of value, or in actual value otherwise conferred; a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
