9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (7) TMI 841 - HC - CustomsInterest on delayed refund - Whether the respondents were liable to pay interest on delayed refund of duty erroneously collected and became refundable in pursuant to order made prior to the amendment of Section 27 from the date of deposit or from date of order by which refund became due or in terms of the amended Section 27-A or from the date of final order passed in the refund proceedings Held that - In the absence of any definition of expression relevant date u/s 27 as it was found in the Central Excise enactment assessee was not eligible for the interest. Whether the Tribunal was right in computing the interest payable on the amount of duty to be refunded to the assessee after expiry of three months from the date of receipt of the final order passed in appeal arising out of refund proceeding and not from the date of order passed in the Assessment proceedings by the CC(Appeals)where the assessment order was set aside and declared value was directed to be accepted and consequently the amount became refundable Held that - liability of the revenue to pay interest under Section 11BB of the Act commences from the date of expiry of three months from the date of receipt of application for refund under Section 11B(1) of the Act and not on the expiry of the said period from the date on which order of refund is made - following the judgement of Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited V. Union of India and others(2011 (10) TMI 16 - Supreme Court of India) decided against the assessee.
Issues Involved
1. Liability to pay interest on delayed refund of duty erroneously collected. 2. Computation of interest payable on the amount of duty to be refunded. Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis 1. Liability to Pay Interest on Delayed Refund of Duty Erroneously Collected The primary issue was whether the respondents were liable to pay interest on the delayed refund of duty erroneously collected, and if so, from which date the interest should be computed. The appellants argued for interest from the date of deposit (July 1989) or from the date of the order by which the refund became due (30.9.1992), or as per the amended Section 27A of the Customs Act effective from 26.5.1995, or from the date of the final order dated 28.8.2001. The court analyzed the provisions of Sections 27 and 27A of the Customs Act, which deal with the claim for refund of duty and interest on belated refunds, respectively. It was noted that Section 27A provides for interest if the refund is not made within three months from the date of receipt of the application. 2. Computation of Interest Payable on the Amount of Duty to be Refunded The second issue was whether the Tribunal was correct in computing the interest payable on the refunded amount from the date of receipt of the final order in appeal arising out of refund proceedings rather than from the date of the assessment order by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) dated 30.9.1992. The court emphasized that the relevant date for the computation of interest should be in accordance with Section 27A, which stipulates that interest is payable if the refund is not made within three months from the date of receipt of the application. The court held that the appellants could validly claim interest only after the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals on 17.03.1999, and not from the date of the order by the Collector of Customs (Appeals). Detailed Judgment Summary Background and Procedural History The appellants, importers of mulberry raw silk, had paid an enhanced value under protest due to the authorities not accepting their declared price. After a series of appeals and remands, the Tribunal finally allowed the appellants' claim on 17.03.1999, confirming the value declared by the appellants. The appellants then applied for a refund of the excess duty with interest. The Assistant Collector (Customs) initially rejected their claim, but the Commissioner (Appeals) partially refunded the amount. Subsequent appeals and remands led to the Tribunal allowing the refund claim on 28.08.2001. However, the Deputy Commissioner of Customs granted the refund without interest, leading the appellants to seek clarification and direction from the Tribunal for the payment of interest. Court's Analysis and Conclusion The court analyzed the provisions of Sections 27 and 27A of the Customs Act, noting that interest on delayed refunds is payable if the refund is not made within three months from the date of receipt of the application. The court rejected the appellants' contention that they were entitled to interest from the date of the order by the Collector of Customs (Appeals) in 1992, stating that the claim for refund could only arise after the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals in 1999. The court held that the appellants were entitled to interest only from the expiry of three months from the date of receipt of the application for refund, as per Section 27A of the Customs Act. Relevance of Central Excise Act Provisions The court also addressed the appellants' reliance on the provisions of the Central Excise Act and related case law. It noted that while Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act is in pari materia with Section 27A of the Customs Act, the specific language and context of the Customs Act provisions must be considered. The court found no justification to import the definition of 'relevant date' from the Central Excise Act into the Customs Act. Final Judgment The court dismissed the appeals, holding that the appellants were entitled to interest on the refund amount only from the expiry of three months from the date of receipt of the application for refund, in accordance with Section 27A of the Customs Act. The court clarified that the relevant date for the computation of interest is the date of receipt of the application for refund, not the date of the order by the Collector of Customs (Appeals). Conclusion The judgment provides a detailed analysis of the provisions related to the refund of duty and interest on delayed refunds under the Customs Act, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the statutory timelines and procedures for claiming interest on refunds.
|
