TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 424X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authority and the appellate authority has held that the respondent is entitled to interest as per the Notification issued by the Government three months immediately after coming into force of the Amendment Act introducing Section 27A up-to 10-1-2001 when the refund was made. There is a proceeding regarding refund claim of Rs. 2,46,606/- which was rejected by the original order and order-in-Appeal No. 114/2004 passed by the Collector of Appeals wherein, by the order-in-original dated 19-4-1995 considering his claim for refund was rejected. Being aggrieved by the same, an appeal came to be preferred before the CESTAT in Appeal No. 49/1996 and the CESTAT by the order dated 9-4-1999 allowed the appeal and held that the denial of the refund clai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent of refund amount immediately after three months from the date of the Presidential Assent and the Amendment Act, 1995, till 10-1-2001 that the claim of the respondent was refunded as per the order of the CESTAT dated 9-4-1999. Being aggrieved by the said order passed by the CESTAT this appeal has been filed which has been admitted for consideration of the following questions of law:- "Whether it is correct on the part of the Tribunal to direct Department to grant interest without following the provisions of Sec. 27(1), 27(2) and 27A of Customs Act 1962 and provisions of Customs Refund Application(Form) Regulations, 1995?" We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -4-1999, the refund has been made up-to 10-1-2001. It is clear from the order passed by the CESTAT dated 9-4-1999 that the appellant therein who is the respondent herein is entitled to all the consequential reliefs as per law. Section 27A has been introduced by the Amendment Act, 1995 with effect from 26-5-1995 and therefore the claim for payment of interest on the delayed refund as per the order passed by the CESTAT dated 9-4-1999 cannot be denied to the respondent. The fact that the appellant was liable to refund a sum of Rs. 2,46,606/- and the same has been refunded pursuant to the order passed by the CESTAT on 10-1-2001, it is not now open to the appellant to contend that no documents are produced to show that the amount was with the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|