2026 (9) TMI 1854

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t of duty. 2.1 An investigation was conducted on 17.12.2014 and 05.03.2014, wherein the appellant deposited a sum of Rs.26,00,000/-. 2.2 Thereafter, the matter was adjudicated and demand of Rs.30,00,000/- was confirmed vide Order dated 25.02.2016. 2.3 The said order was appealed before the ld.Commissioner (Appeals) and the ld.Commissioner (Appeals) vide its Order dated 18.04.2017, set aside the adjudication order confirming demand. 2.4 The said order was challenged before this Tribunal and this Tribunal has dismissed the appeal filed by the Department on 28.11.2017. 2.5 The said order of this Tribunal was challenged before the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court and the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court remanded back to this Tribunal on 16....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....peals), who dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant. 2.15 Against the said order, also the appellant is in appeals before me. 3. The ld.Counsel for the appellant relies on decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Paradeep Phosphates Ltd. Vs. Additional Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Bhubaneswar reported in 2026 (106) GSTL 112 (Ori), wherein the Hon'ble High Court allowed the interest from the date of deposit till its realization. Therefore, he prays, the interest be granted. 4. On the other hand, the ld.A.R. for the Revenue submitted that the interest of refund claim is to be paid after three months from the date of filing of the refund claim. Admittedly, in this case, the refund has been sanctioned wit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s refunded. 7.3 Since the question involved in the present case relates to interest on amount refunded, it is clear that the petitioner is entitled to interest on the amount refunded with respect to IGST collected on "ocean freight" for the period the opposite parties retained the same and restrained the petitioner from utilising it. In other words, such interest should commence to run from the date on which the petitioner parted with the money in the first instance and was restrained from using such amount representing the IGST on the component of "ocean freight". 7.4 The refund itself is as a result of a finding that the tax ought not to have been collected from the petitioner in the first place. If the tax has to be ref....