2024 (11) TMI 136 - AT - Customs

Rejection of interest under Section 27A of the Customs Act, 1962 - 20% deposit do not partake the nature of duty under the Customs Act, 1962 and are security deposits refund of which do not attract interest liability on the department relying upon the orders of Rajendra Mechanical Industries 2004 (9) TMI 533 - CESTAT, KOLKATA and Advance Mechanical Works 2004 (12) TMI 107 - CESTAT, MUMBAI HELD THAT - This issue is no more res integra and this Tribunal in the case of M/s Saraswati Knitwear Pvt. Ltd. 2023 (9) TMI 582 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH has examined this issue and held that the appellant-assessee is not entitled to interest on refund if the assessment is finalized within three months as prescribed under Section 18(4) of the Customs Act, 1962. Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues:
- Claim for interest under Section 27A of the Customs Act, 1962 on 20% deposits under the PDA Regulation, 2011.

Analysis:
The appellant imported nylon yarn and filed a claim for refund of Rs.46,50,912/- paid as 20% deposits under the PDA Regulation, 2011, along with a claim for interest. The original authority admitted the claim but rejected the interest claim, stating that 20% deposits do not constitute duty under the Customs Act, 1962. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld this decision, relying on previous tribunal judgments. The appellant argued that interest on refunds is a consequence of admissible claims, citing relevant case law. The Revenue contended that interest is payable only if the refund is not granted within three months from final assessment, relying on various decisions. The Tribunal, in a similar case, held that interest is not applicable if the assessment is finalized within three months, as per Section 18(4) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, stating that the appellant is not entitled to interest on the refund granted within the prescribed period, as per statutory provisions and case law.

The Tribunal emphasized that interest on refunds is governed by Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1962. It noted that the appellant was provisionally assessed under Section 18, which specifies conditions for provisional assessment and final assessment, including the payment of interest. The Tribunal highlighted that interest is payable if the refund is not granted within three months from the final assessment, as per Section 18(4) of the Act. It rejected the appellant's argument for interest, citing statutory provisions and case law. The Tribunal upheld the impugned order, following the decision in a similar case where the appellant was denied interest on a refund granted within the stipulated period.

The Tribunal's decision was based on a thorough analysis of the legal provisions and precedents. It clarified that interest on refunds is subject to the timelines specified in Section 18(4) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal's ruling aligned with the statutory framework and established case law, emphasizing that interest is not applicable if the refund is granted within the prescribed three-month period. The appellant's claim for interest on the refund of 20% deposits was thus dismissed by the Tribunal, upholding the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) and the original authority.