1989 (1) TMI 259

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nterest on the said amount of Rs. 10.35 lakhs at the rate of 18 per cent. per annum. (ii) This ld. Authority may kindly grant such other reliefs as this ld. Authority deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. (iii) Cost of the proceedings be awarded in favour of the appellant." 2. Shri G.L. Rawal, the learned advocate, has appeared on behalf of the applicant. He has reiterated the contentions made in the miscellaneous application and stated that the Redemption Fine & Penalty were paid almost nine years back and the refund was received by the applicant after two years and one month from the date of the passing of the order by the Tribunal. Shri Rawal has pleaded that the applicant is entitled to interest at th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....argument he has referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Income-tax Officer, Cannanore v. M.K. Mohammed Kunhi reported in AIR 1969 SC 432 wherein it was held that the Tribunal has got inherent powers to grant stay. He has pleaded for the grant of costs. 3. Shri A.S.R. Nair, the learned senior departmental representative who has appeared on behalf of the respondent, states that Customs Act, 1962 is a complete code and there is no provision for the payment of interest under the Customs Act, 1962. In support of his argument he has relied on a judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sudhir Chimanlal v. Union of India reported in 1988 (36) E.L.T. 406 (Bom.) where the Bombay High Court had held that: "It is....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t due has been withheld without just cause, unless there be a statute or customs or agreement to sanction the grant of the same. Here, nothing of that nature can be said to exist. Dr. Kantawala pleads that the relief to be granted, require respondents to deposit the amount of refund in court, as otherwise suitors succeeding against the customs, find it virtually impossible to get relief. There may be some substance in this grievance of the petitioner. Nonetheless, there are measures available to suitors to execute orders passed in their favour. Therefore, no special directions, as solicited by the petitioner, are called for. Hence the order." Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh v. M/s. Doaba Co-op....