2008 (8) TMI 731

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....el, Jt. CDR, for the Appellant. Shri Harishankar, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : B.S.V. Murthy, Member (T)]. -  In this appeal, the Revenue is challenging the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) wherein he has allowed the interest on refund of pre-deposit of Rs. 1.25 crores granted three months from the date of the decision of the Tribunal. The contention of the revenu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d by the Tribunal was not the final decision but only an order to adjudicating authority to finalize the value and duty. Therefore, only after the appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court and the assessment was finalized, the refund was required to be granted i.e. within three months after the date of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court , which has been done by the Department. Learned Counsel o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... can it be only said that when the matter was decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court rejecting the appeal filed by revenue, the assessment could have been finalized. The order of the CESTAT was very clear and there was clear direction that value of the marble block imported by the respondents should be assessed at 95 US $ per MT and therefore, as argued by the Learned Counsel for the respondents the....