9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Error in directing payment of interest after three months from the date of the final order. 2. Error in directing payment of interest at a flat rate of 30%. Analysis: Issue 1: The revenue contended that two errors were apparent in the Tribunal's order. The first error was the direction to pay interest after three months from the date of the final order, which was deemed incorrect. The language of Section 27A was cited by the Learned DR, emphasizing that interest becomes payable three months after the application for refund is received. In this case, as the application was filed on 1-1-01, interest would be payable from 2-4-01, following the statutory provisions. Different interest rates were specified by the Central Government through various notifications during different periods. Issue 2: The second error pointed out was the direction to pay interest at a flat rate of 30%, which was not in line with the rates fixed by the Central Government under the relevant notifications. The contention raised by the Learned DR was not opposed by the Counsel for the respondents as it aligned with the statutory provisions. Consequently, the Tribunal accepted the revenue's plea, rectified the mistake in the order, and directed the payment of interest according to the rates set by the Central Government under the specified notifications. The interest was to be paid after three months from the date of the application, as per the statutory requirements. In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the ROM application, rectifying the errors in the original order and ensuring compliance with the statutory provisions regarding the payment of interest for the refund claim. The judgment emphasized the importance of adhering to the prescribed interest rates and timelines as per the notifications issued by the Central Government.
|
