Appellant entitled to interest on revenue deposit and compensation interest on Order-in-Appeal The appellant was held entitled to interest at 12% per annum from the date of deposit on the revenue deposit, as it was not duty or a pre-deposit. ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Appellant entitled to interest on revenue deposit and compensation interest on Order-in-Appeal
The appellant was held entitled to interest at 12% per annum from the date of deposit on the revenue deposit, as it was not duty or a pre-deposit. Additionally, the appellant was awarded interest as compensation at 6% from the date of the impugned Order-in-Appeal until disbursement, as the deposited amount did not appear to be duty or pre-deposit. Both issues were decided in favor of the appellant, resulting in the setting aside of the challenged order and allowing the appeal.
Issues involved: 1. Entitlement to interest on the amount deposited during investigation until disbursement. 2. Entitlement to interest on the interest sanctioned as compensation for monetary loss and harassment.
Analysis:
Issue 1: The appellant claimed interest on the amount deposited during investigation. The Tribunal referred to the case law of Sandvik Asia Ltd., which held that interest is payable on the refund of amounts not owed to the Department from the date of deposit. The Tribunal also cited the case of M/s. Parle Agro Pvt. Ltd. vs CGST, NOIDA, supporting the entitlement to interest from the date of deposit. It was noted that the amount in question was not a duty deposit but a revenue deposit. The Department acknowledged that the amount was neither duty nor a pre-deposit. Consequently, the appellant was held entitled to interest at 12% per annum from the date of deposit.
Issue 2: Regarding the entitlement to interest on the interest sanctioned as compensation, the Tribunal observed that the appellant had already been granted interest on the principal amount. Referring to the impugned Show Cause Notice, it was evident that the deposited amount did not appear to be duty or pre-deposit. The Tribunal relied on the case of M/s. Digi Pro Import and Export P Ltd. vs Union of India, highlighting the unauthorized collection of duty during investigation. As no contrary decisions were presented, the appellant was awarded interest as compensation at 6% from the date of the impugned Order-in-Appeal until disbursement.
In conclusion, both issues were decided in favor of the appellant, leading to the setting aside of the order under challenge and allowing the appeal.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
TaxTMI 
