9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1324X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und should be implemented and refund should be granted. In the present case the refund has already been granted despite filing the appeal before the High Court therefore interest being piggy back of the refund should also be granted. - it is clear that without stay, order of the Tribunal has to be implemented which is the requirement of the principle of judicial discipline. I, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the impugned order; hence, the same is sustained - Decided against Revenue. - Appeal No. C/89783/14 & Application No. C/EH/93979/15 - - - Dated:- 3-8-2015 - Mr. Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial) For the Respondent : Shri D.K. Sinha, Asstt. Commissioner (A.R.) ORDER Per : Ramesh Nair The respondent filed early ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssel. The said refund was rejected vide order-in-original dated 10/2/2005. Being aggrieved by the said order the importer/respondent filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the order-in-original. Thereafter the respondent filed appeal before the CESTAT which was allowed with consequential relief. In order to Honour CESTAT order refund of ₹ 31,17,091/- was sanctioned vide order-in-original No. DIV/Dapoli/3/13-14 and paid on 1/1/2014. The respondent made request for grant of interest on the delayed sanction of refund claim. The adjudicating authority vide order-in-original dated 27/2/2014 held that the respondent are not eligible for interest from 10/1/2001 for the reason that the CESTAT in order dated 5/9/2013 has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by Honble Mumbai High Court. It is also observed that implementing the Tribunal order, Revenue has already sanctioned the refund therefore I do not understand why the consequential relief of the refund i.e. interest should not be given to the assessee. Even as per the CBEC Circular No. 967/01/2013-CX dated 1/1/2013, if the Revenue is not in position to obtain the stay within three months from the date of order of the Tribunal, the order allowing refund should be implemented and refund should be granted. In the present case the refund has already been granted despite filing the appeal before the High Court therefore interest being piggy back of the refund should also be granted. Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) in para 12 of his order has given ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
