2016 (7) TMI 1298

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nging Ext.P3 and for a direction to the 3rd respondent to forthwith sanction and grant refund of  Rs. 1,15,15,214/- made by the petitioner with interest from the date of order passed by the Appellate Tribunal, i.e., 18/11/2002. 2. The facts involved in the writ petition would disclose that the petitioner had deposited the aforesaid amount being the differential import duty as per classification 8528 and 8525.20 under protest. It was indicated in Ext.P4 that the payment is made under protest being the differential duty payable. The petitioner had also preferred an appeal against the order dated 22/5/2001 which was pending before the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs (Appeals), Cochin. The appeal was decided against the petit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....interregnum, this writ petition is filed seeking the aforesaid reliefs. 3. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents inter alia stating that when the Supreme court had directed that the excess duty paid has to be refunded in accordance with law, in order to comply with the said direction, show cause notice had been issued. There was no reason for the petitioner to have approached this Court and the 3rd respondent would have passed appropriate orders within a reasonable time. However, on account of the pendency of the above writ petition, no order has been passed in the matter. 4. The main contention urged by the petitioner is that the amount deposited was a pre-deposit in terms of Section 129E of the Customs Act an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n v. Shree Simandar Enterprises [2012 (283) E.L.T.369 (Ker.)] had considered the scope and effect of Sections 129E and 129EE and it was held at paras 6 and 8 as under:- "6. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. I am of the opinion that the stand of the petitioner in the review petition is totally hyper-technical and unreasonable. When an appellate authority allows an appeal filed against imposition of tax, duty, fine, penalty etc., it is the bounden duty of the assessing authority, as part of a democratic government, to refund the amounts covered by orders of the appellate authority, when appeals are allowed fully or partially. The same shall be refunded even without a formal request for the same. Certainly, on a reque....