9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 692X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Sea Port, Chennai requesting to process the refund claim at the earliest and sanction the refund amount along with interest. Later, on 14.10.2016, Order-in-Original was passed rejecting the refund claim stating that the appellant have not produced essential documents to process the refund claim. The appellant filed an appeal against this order and vide Order in Appeal dated 21.2.2017, the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) after taking note of the submissions made by the appellant that they have submitted all relevant documents along with the refund claim remanded the matter to the original authority to process the refund claim and also consider the request for interest made by the appellant. The ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that the appellant has filed the refund claim on 29.3.2016. It is also stated by the Commissioner (Appeals) that the appellants have made strong argument that they have filed all the necessary documents along with the refund claim on 29.3.2016 itself. The Commissioner (Appeal) has called for the file and on perusal it was noticed that only photocopies of refund claim with the signature of the appellant was present in the file. There upon, the matter was remanded to the original authority to process the refund claim expeditiously and also look into the claim of interest made by the appellant in terms of Section 27A of the Customs Act, 1962. Even after such remand, the department was sleeping over the proce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Commissioner (Appeals) has only remanded the matter to look into the issue of interest and therefore the appellants have no grievance of filing this appeal. 4. Heard both sides. 5. The issue is with regard to the request of the appellant to pay interest on the delayed refund. From the records, it is very much clear that the original authority who has sanctioned the refund vide Order-in-Original No.260/2018 dated 29.5.2018 has observed that the refund claim has been filed on 29.3.2016. Thus the refund claim was submitted within the time and before the correct jurisdiction during the relevant time. The refund, however, has been sanctioned only on 29.5.2018. Thus, obviously, there is a delay in sanctioning the refund. The appellant has a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
