By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, FEB 07, 2019: THE appellant had imported Cable Jointing kits, the classification of which was claimed under CSH 8547 of the CTA, 1975.

Revenue disagreed and classified the product under CSH 3926.

Differential duty was paid Under Protest and subsequently refund was claimed on 06.07.1989.

The appellant succeeded on the issue of classification before the Bombay High Court and, thereafter, filed a reminder letter dated 06.04.1994.

The said refund claim was rejected by the Revenue as barred by limitation.

In the matter of the appeal filed, the Tribunal remanded the matter, in January 2001, to the Commissioner(A) who decided the issue in favour of the assessee.

A stay application was filed by the Revenue but the same was rejected by CESTAT on 01.07.2002.

Consequently, a refund claim of Rs.72,46,441/- was sanctioned to the appellant.

Thereafter, the appellant made an application on 18.03.2004 seeking interest for the period from 1.7.1995 to 27.08.2002 on the delayed refund amounting to Rs.70,46,363/-.

This claim was rejected by the lower authorities and, therefore, the appellant is again before the CESTAT. They rely on the apex court decision in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. -   2011-TIOL-105-SC-CX.  

The AR supported the order of the lower authorities.

After extracting the provisions of s.11BB of the CEA, 1944, and the apex court decision in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. (supra), the Bench observed -

"7. Applying the principles laid down in the above case, we find that the appellant had filed refund claim on 06.07.1989 and reminder on 06.04.1994 after Hon'ble Bombay High Court's judgment in their favour. Hence, they are eligible to interest on expiry of three months from the date when the Finance Bill, 1995 received the assent of the President of India i.e. on 26.05.1995. Consequently, interest is available to the appellant from 27.08.1995 till the date, the amount was paid to them."

The Appeal was allowed.

(See 2019-TIOL-405-CESTAT-MUM)