9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (6) TMI 316X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... period of delay. - This argument would render the remaining successive notifications redundant and, therefore, the argument cannot be accepted. The expression “time being” denotes each and every point of time of delay If the delay starts on 12-5-2000, the rate of interest payable will be 15%. If this delay continues beyond 10-5-2001, interest becomes payable at the rate of 9% for the period from 11-5-2001. Likewise, where the delay continues beyond 12-5-2001, interest becomes payable at the rate of 8% from 13-5-2002. - The second question relates to the assessee’s claim for interest on interest - respondent submits that interest on interest requires to be paid by the Revenue at the same rate at which the simple interest is payable under Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 8% and 6% of interest respectively payable to a successful refund-claimant in the event of continued delay of refund. The rate of interest payable for the earlier part of the delay was 15% in terms of Notifications 32/95-Cus. (N.T.), dated 26-5-1995 and 36/95-Cus. (N.T.), dated 12-5-2000. 2. On the above basis, the original authority sanctioned interest at the rate of 15% for the earlier part of the period of delay of refund and at reduced rates for the remaining part of the period of delay. On the other hand, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) chose to allow interest at the uniform rate of 15% for the entire period of delay. In this scenario, the learned J.C.D.R. has argued in defence of the order of the original authority, and the lea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... original authority. Therefore, the view taken by the appellate authority cannot be accepted and to this extent the impugned order is bad in law. 3. The second question relates to the assessee's claim for interest on interest. The learned J.C.D.R. submits that there is no provision in the Customs Act for grant of this benefit to any refund-claimant. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that interest on interest requires to be paid by the Revenue at the same rate at which the simple interest is payable under Section 27A of the Customs Act, on the principle laid down by the Apex Court in Sandvik Asia Ltd. v. CIT, Pune - 2006 (196) E.L.T. 257 (S.C.) - 2007 (8) S.T.R. 193 (S.C.). I find that the lower appellate au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
