Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2003 (5) TMI 78

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ime of investigation is not yet refunded. The appellant, therefore, prays that there must be a direction to the Commissioner, Ghaziabad to return the above amount with due interest as per rule. 2. We heard Shri J.M. Sharma learned Counsel on behalf of the applicant. Shri A.N. Haksar, Sr. Advocate for the respondent. 3. The appellants had deposited with the department an amount of Rs. 1 Crore during the investigation. The appellant made request for refund of the amount pursuant to the final order. Dy. Commissioner, Central Excise, Secunderabad sanctioned refund of Rs. 15,80,000/-. Appellant filed three Miscellaneous Application Nos. 389, 390 391/2002 on 23-10-2002 for direction to the respondents to make the refund. During the pendency .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ted 2nd January, 2002. 6. In a recent decision in the case of Eastern Coils Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner, Central Excise, Calcutta reported in 2003 (153) E.L.T. 290 a learned Judge of the Calcutta High Court had occasion to consider a similar issue. The relevant paragraph reads as follows :- "13. So far the refund in any form including the refund of pre-deposit is concerned, there is no fixed rate of interest to be declared as appropriate. In 1997 (95) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) (Kuil Fireworks Industries v. Collector of Central Excise) Supreme Court held that the pre-deposit made by assessee to be returned to him with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. But I do not find any analysis or fixation of rate of interest as 12% in the said judgment. Si .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Revenue cannot be compelled to pay interest. Calcutta High Court was not inclined to accept the above contention. Similar is the contention raised before us by the learned Sr. Counsel on behalf of the Revenue. Apart from the above, we find that the Circular dated 2nd January, 2002 also indicates that delay of refund would invite liability for interest. 8. In the above circumstances we are inclined to direct the respondent to refund the amount of Rs. 61.70 Lakhs deposited by the appellant with the Department within a period of 10 days with interest at the rate of 12% from the date of expiry of three months from the date of receipt of copy of the final order of this Tribunal dated 12-2-2002. 9. Issue copy of this order to both sides today .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates