9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (4) TMI 1189 - AT - CustomsEntitlement to Interest - Section 27A of the Customs Act - delay in making refund - Held that - Hon ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Principal Commissioner of Customs Vs Riso India Pvt. Ltd. 2015 (10) TMI 1099 - DELHI HIGH COURT held that the provisions in the Act concerning refunds and interest on delayed refunds, would equally apply to refund of SAD leviable under Section 3 of the CTA - the judgement of Madras High Court in KSJ Metal Pvt. Ltd. 2013 (6) TMI 148 - MADRAS HIGH COURT which is relied upon in the Riso India judgment, has been stayed on 21-01-2005, on an identical issue in writ appeal filed by the department in the case of Radhalakshmi Metallurgicals referred to by the Revenue. Judicial propriety would require that the directions of the Commissioner (Appeals) are to be kept in abeyance till the final outcome of the issue by the jurisdictional High Court of Madras - appeal allowed by way of remand.
Issues:
Appeal against the setting aside of the order of rejection of refund by Commissioner (Appeals) regarding Additional Duty of Customs refund and grant of interest on the refund. Analysis: 1. The respondent filed a claim for refund of 4% of Additional Duty of Customs under Section 3(5) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The initial refund claim was rejected for non-fulfillment of conditions. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the rejection order and directed the lower authority to re-adjudicate the matter, allowing the refund claim with interest if found admissible under Section 27A of the Act. The department appealed against the grant of interest on the refund. 2. The department challenged the grant of interest on the refund ordered by the Commissioner (Appeals). The appellate authority relied on a decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, stating that provisions regarding refunds and interest on delayed refunds apply to the refund of Additional Duty of Customs. The department argued that the issue is not settled as per the Madras High Court's judgment in another case, which has been stayed. Therefore, the direction to sanction interest on delayed refund does not arise until the final outcome of the appeals filed by the department. 3. Considering the unsettled nature of the issue and the stay on a related judgment by the Madras High Court, the Tribunal decided to remand the matter back to the original authority. The Tribunal directed the original authority to decide on the issue after the final outcome of the appeals filed by the department. The appeal filed by the department was allowed, and the directions of the Commissioner (Appeals) were kept in abeyance until the final resolution of the issue by the Madras High Court. In conclusion, the Tribunal remanded the matter back to the original authority to decide on the grant of interest on the refund after the final outcome of related appeals pending before the Madras High Court. The decision highlighted the importance of awaiting the final resolution of the issue before enforcing any directions regarding the grant of interest on delayed refunds of Additional Duty of Customs.
|
