9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (4) TMI 281X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g a sum of ₹ 6,31,811/- and ₹ 18,62,355/- respectively the petitioners had communicated to the respondent authorities and made request for 6% of interest which, upon calculation, comes to ₹ 3,40,321. There are no other ground except the unclarity of the authority in processing the refund claim. This interdepartmental lack of clarity can hardly effect the right of the parties particularly when there is statutory provision permitting the interest on the refund claim, if the sum is not paid within stipulated time period of 3 months - respondent No.2 is directed to revise and modify the orders dated 19.3.2019, 5.4.2019 and 10.4.2019 also calculate and process statutory interest as to be paid under Section 27-A of the Custom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct is charged for counter balancing Sales Tax, VAT etc. when such goods were subsequently sold in India, exemption is available from the SAD. 2.2 The petitioners were entitled to the refund of 4% SAD paid on the goods purchased from the SEZ unit. Therefore, the petitioners moved refund applications on 19.10.2009, 2.2.2010, 4.12.2010, 22.01.2011, 12.01.2011, 04.11.2010 and 18.01.2011 respectively before the Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Refund). 2.3 The said refund applications were not decided by second respondent therefore, petitioners moved Special Civil Application No. 18948 of 2018 and Special Civil Application No. 18950 of 2018 whereby this Court directed second respondent to decide petitioners' representations and claim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r directing the 2nd respondent herein to revise and modify all the four orders dated 10.4.2019 (Annexure C ), thereby sanctioning and paying statutory interest in the petitioner's favour on refund aggregating to ₹ 18,62,335/- sanctioned to the petitioner under these orders; 3. Upon service of notice, affidavit in reply is filed by other side. We noticed that subject refund claims were submitted by the petitioners on 19.10.2009, 4.12.2010, 22.01.2011, 12.01.2011, 04.11.2010 and 18.01.2011 seeking 4% SAD paid by them at the time of import from unit in Kandla SEZ and Circular No.11/2017 dated 31.3.2017 by CBEC was issued after more than 7 years of filing of applications of refund. According to them interest could not be allowed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 6. Learned Standing Counsel Mr. P.Y. Divyeshwar, upon instruction does not dispute the entitlement of interest of refund claim. He however, submitted that there are many refund claims pending to process. 7. Even otherwise, it would be profitable to reproduce Section 27-A of the Customs Act, 1962 at this stage which reads thus:- 27A. Interest on delayed refunds.- If any duty ordered to be refunded under sub-section (2) of section 27 to an applicant is not refunded within three months from the date of receipt of application under sub-section (1) of that section, there shall be paid to that applicant interest at such rate, [not below five per cent.] and not exceeding thirty per cent. per annum as is for the time being fixed [b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e notified by the Central Government in the Official Gazette. It has been consistently 6% which has been notified by the Central Government. We also notice that after receiving that refund amount which is aggregating a sum of ₹ 6,31,811/- and ₹ 18,62,355/- respectively the petitioners had communicated to the respondent authorities and made request for 6% of interest which, upon calculation, comes to ₹ 3,40,321. This has been calculation up to 19.3.2019 and 5.4.2019. For this respective cheque Nos. 543136, 543150 dated 19.3.2019 and 5.4.2019 have been issued for the amount of ₹ 4,38,695/- and 1,93,116/- in case of petitioner in Special Civil Application No.13167 of 2019 whereas cheque Nos. 543156, 543156, 543156, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
