9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (12) TMI 1481 - AT - CustomsDemand of interest on delayed refund claim - Refund under Notfn. No 102/2007 and CBEC Circular No 6/2008-CUS dated 28.4.2008 - Held that - Adjudicating Authority while deciding the refund claim of the appellant under OIO dated 13.9.2013 and 9.10.2013 has not passed any order with respect to claim of interest on the delayed payment of refund. Under such circumstances order, with respect to interest on the payment of refund, passed by the First Appellate Authority is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Adjudicating Authority to decide the claim of the appellant with respect to interest on delayed payment in the light of judgements relied upon by the appellant and the Revenue, during the course of hearing. The appeals filed by the appellant are allowed by way of demand to the Adjudicating Authority. - Matter reanded back - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues:
1. Admissibility of refund on account of payment of SAD. 2. Whether interest on delayed refund can be allowed under Notification No 102/2007/Cus. Issue 1 - Admissibility of refund on account of payment of SAD: The appellant filed appeals regarding Order No 201-202/2014CUS/Commr(A)/Ahd dated 9.5.2014, questioning the admissibility of a refund related to the payment of SAD. The First Appellate Authority ruled in favor of the appellant, stating that the refund was admissible. However, the Authority also held that interest on delayed refund cannot be granted under Notification No 102/2007/Cus, citing the case of Global International Vs CCE, Kanpur, 2013(292)ELT.102(Tri.Del.). Issue 2 - Allowance of interest on delayed refund under Notification No 102/2007/Cus: The appellant's representative relied on the judgment of the Honorable Madras High Court in the case of KSJ Metal Impex (P) Ltd vs 2013(294)ELT.211 (MAD) to argue that interest on refunds under Notification No 102/2007 and CBEC Circular No 6/2008-CUS is payable as per Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962. On the contrary, the Revenue's representative referred to another judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of Shakun Overseas Ltd Vs CCE(Appeals), Chennai [2013(297)ELT.14 (Mad)], which stated that interest should only be calculated after 3 months from the date of the order passed by an Appellate Authority. The Adjudicating Authority did not reject the appellant's claim for interest, as confirmed during the hearing. Comprehensive Analysis: After hearing both parties and examining the case records, it was noted that the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appellant's claim for interest on delayed refund based on the CESTAT judgment in the Global International case. However, the Madras High Court in the KSJ Metal Impex case held that refunds under Notification No 102/2007 should be treated as refunds under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962. Since the Adjudicating Authority did not address the interest claim in their orders dated 13.9.2013 and 9.10.2013, the First Appellate Authority's decision on interest was set aside. The matter was remanded to the Adjudicating Authority to reconsider the appellant's interest claim in light of the judgments cited by both parties. The appeals by the appellant were allowed, directing the Adjudicating Authority to provide a personal hearing to the appellant during the remand proceedings.
|
