TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1993 (7) TMI 78
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or directing the respondent No. 2 to refund the amount of Rs. 20,66,760.21 alongwith interest at the rate of 15% p.a. from July 30,1991 till the date of payment. The petitioners also request that respondent No. 2 should be committed under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act for deliberately flouting and disobeying writ issued by this Court on July 30, 1991. To appreciate the grievance of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....st to the petitioners at the rate of 15% p.a. on the amount of refund from the date of judgment till the date of payment. 2. Before expiry of twelve weeks, the Parliament amended the provisions of Section 11B of Central Excise Act and the amending provisions came into effect from September 20, 1991. In accordance with the amended provisions, it has become necessary for an assessee claiming refun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urt and that order has become final. In spite of refusal of the Division Bench to grant relief sought by the respondents which was obviously because of the amended provisions of Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, the respondents did not take any step to carry out the writ of this Court. The petitioners thereupon took out the present Notice of motion on April 13, 1992. 3. Shri Desai, learned ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....noured. Realising the futility in the submission, Shri Desai tried to contend that the Division Bench declined to pass order on the motion taken out by the respondents since it was felt that the proper remedy is to seek review of the judgment delivered on July 30, 1991. We decline to entertain any such submission because the record of this Court does not indicate that the Division Bench dismissed ....