TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 1536
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der-in-Original and rejected the appeal of the appellant. As the issue involved in both the appeals is regarding the grant of interest on redemption fine deposited by the appellant. The details of both the appeals are given here in below: Appeal No. Order-In-Original dated Refund C/60490/2025 30.01.2024 Rs. 18,00,000/- C/60519/2025 16.10.2024 Rs. 27,00,000/- Since the issue involved in both the appeals are identical, therefore for the sake of convenience, I take the facts of the appeal No. C/60490/2025 as a lead case. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the appellant is a proprietorship firm engaged in importing iron and steel products, which fell under the 'freely importable' category.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... properly appreciating the facts, the law, and binding judicial precedents. He further submits that in the present case, the department took the view that the goods were liable to be confiscated and therefore imposed a redemption fine under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 along with a penalty, and the appellant got the goods redeemed on payment of such amounts. Thereafter, they contested the confiscation, and the redemption fine was set aside by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in respect of the three bills of entry, and subsequently, the penalty was also set aside by the CESTAT. He further submits that after the decision of the CESTAT, neither the confiscation was sustainable nor any fine was payable, and whatever amount was paid wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed that there is no provision in the Customs Act for the grant of interest except under Section 27A of the Act, according to which interest becomes payable only if the refund is not granted within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the refund application. In support of his submissions, he relied upon the following decisions: * M/s HLG Trading Vs. Principal Commissioner of Customs, Chennai -2026 (38) Centax 158 (Mad). * M/s Ajay Industrial Corporation Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Customs, CRC-I, JNCH, Nhava Sheva, Raigad (2024) Centax 396 (Bom.) * M/s Union of India Vs. Orient Enterprises 1998 (99) ELT 193 (S.C.) * Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) Vs. Daleep Kumar Verma (2024) 24 C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... In the present case, the provisions of Section 11B of the Excise Act would not be applicable. This is for the reason that the appellant was not claiming refund of duty. The applicant, as noticed above, had claimed refund of the revenue deposit. Such a finding has also been clearly recorded by the Tribunal in the order dated 31-1-2017, which order has attained finality. 31. Section 11D of the Excise Aet deals with duties of excise collected from the buyer to be deposited with Central Government. It provides that every person who is liable to pay duty and has collected any amount in excess of the duty assessed from the buyer of such goods In any manner as representing duty of excise, shall forthwith pay the amount so collected to th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2% per annum in matters relating to refund of amount deposited during investigation and adjudication. 40. In Riba Textiles, the Tribunal also granted interest at the rate of 12% on refund of amount deposited during investigation and are the time of entertaining the stay application. 41. In view for the aforesald decisions, and the fact that the rate of interest varies from 6% to 18% in the aforesaid Notifications issued under Sections 11AA, 11BB, 11DD and 11AB of the Excise Act, the grant of interest @ 12% per annum seems to be appropriate. 42. Thus, for the reason stated above, Excise Appeal No. 70628 of 2019 is allowed and the order dated 28-5-2019, passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) is modified to the extent ....