2016 (9) TMI 620 - HC - Customs

Refund of duty along with interest - benefit under Notification No.12/2012 - benefit under Notification No.21/2012 - an appeal from the order of the Commissioner is pending before the learned Tribunal - Held that - The Commissioner has allowed the appeal preferred by the writ petitioner. Therefore, the revenue is liable to carry out that order. The revenue has to make payment. The learned Writ Court has directed the revenue to make such payment. It is clarified that such payment to be made by the revenue shall be subject to result of the appeal pending before the learned Tribunal. Direction to pay cost set aside. Appeal disposed off - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to order allowing the writ petition and refund of duty amount; Benefit under Notification No.12/2012 and No.21/2012; Appeal from the order of the Commissioner pending before the Tribunal; Liability of revenue to make payment; Payment subject to appeal result; Disposal of appeal; Setting aside direction to pay costs.

Analysis:
The High Court of Calcutta addressed the challenge to an order dated 1st July, 2016 passed by the Writ Court, which allowed the writ petition and directed the refund of a duty amount. The Court noted the contention regarding the benefit availed under Notification No.12/2012 and No.21/2012. The appellant argued that the writ petitioner had already benefited from one notification and should not be entitled to the benefit under the other. On the other hand, the respondent contended that this point was not raised before the Commissioner of Customs, thus precluding the revenue from raising it at this stage.

The Court refrained from giving a final answer on this issue, considering an appeal from the Commissioner's order was pending before the Tribunal. The Commissioner had allowed the appeal by the writ petitioner, making the revenue liable to carry out that order. Consequently, the revenue was directed to make the payment, subject to the result of the appeal pending before the Tribunal. The Court clarified that the payment by the revenue would be subject to the outcome of the pending appeal.

Ultimately, the appeal was disposed of by the Court, with the direction to pay costs being set aside. The judgment highlighted the importance of the pending appeal's result in determining the revenue's liability to make the payment and emphasized the need to await the Tribunal's decision before finalizing the matter.