2016 (3) TMI 470 - HC - Customs

Writ petition - Grant of refund claim of duty and interest - No violation of conditions of the Notification No.44/2002 dated 19.04.2002 - Held that - without going into the merits or with regard to the pendency of the appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, the refund claim made by the petitioner shall be directed to be considered by the 1st respondent within a reasonable time. - Petition disposed of

Summary

Issues:
1. Mandamus for refund sanction with interest
2. Allegations of duty payment and interest
3. Show cause notice and denial of notification benefit
4. Appeal to Commissioner of Customs
5. Refund application and pendency of departmental appeal
6. Interference with departmental appeal and grant of stay

Issue 1: Mandamus for refund sanction with interest
The petitioner sought a Writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to sanction a refund amount of Rs. 37,08,580/- along with interest within a specified time frame. The petitioner's application for the refund was dated 22.10.2013.

Issue 2: Allegations of duty payment and interest
The petitioner, engaged in quarrying and manufacturing, filed a bill of entry for the clearance of Hitachi Hydraulic Excavator against an EPCG Licence. Subsequently, District Revenue Intelligence officials found discrepancies, leading to the petitioner paying duty and interest amounts. A show cause notice was issued, followed by an order denying the notification benefit under Customs Act, 1962.

Issue 3: Show cause notice and denial of notification benefit
A show cause notice dated 13.03.2012 was issued to the petitioner regarding the denial of notification benefit under the Customs Act, 1962. The 1st respondent passed an order denying the notification benefit, prompting the petitioner to appeal before the Commissioner of Customs, who ruled in favor of the petitioner.

Issue 4: Appeal to Commissioner of Customs
The petitioner appealed before the Commissioner of Customs, who held that the petitioner had not violated the conditions of the notification and allowed the appeal on 11.07.2013. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a refund application for the sanctioned amount.

Issue 5: Refund application and pendency of departmental appeal
The petitioner filed a refund application dated 22.10.2013 for the sanctioned amount. However, the 2nd respondent informed the petitioner of a departmental appeal filed before the Customs Tribunal against the appellate order.

Issue 6: Interference with departmental appeal and grant of stay
The department filed an appeal along with a stay application against the appellate order. The petitioner argued for refund without averment of a stay granted by the Tribunal. The Court, without delving into the appeal's merits, directed the 1st respondent to consider the refund application within four weeks from the date of the order.

In conclusion, the Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the 1st respondent to consider the refund application of the petitioner for Rs. 37,08,580/- with interest within a specified timeframe, without interference in the pending departmental appeal.