SEIKO BRUSHWARE (INDIA) Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, KOLKATA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned S.D.R. Nobody appeared for the appellants despite notice and adjournments granted earlier. There is also no adjournment request. I find that the appellants, in their letter dated nil (received in the registry on 27 -9 -07) in response to an earlier notice of hearing, have requested for deciding the case on the basis of the grounds of appeal. As such, the submissions made by the appellants in writing have been taken on record and considered along with the case records and the submissions made by the learned S.D.R., Shri J.K. Jha for the Department.

(2.) I find that under the present law relating to refunds, since the principles of unjust enrichment have to be adhered to and examined, the appellants are required to make an application for refund even in cases where refund arises out of any order of a court or tribunal. The provision of paying interest applies if no refund is sanctioned and paid within three months from the date of making an application. Admittedly, in this case the appellants became entitled to a refund and the same became payable pursuant to an Order of the Tribunal. In fact, in this case the Modification Application filed by the Department was subsequently rejected by the Tribunal with the direction that the refund should be sanctioned within a period of four weeks. There is no averment by the appellants that the time limit given by the Tribunal was not adhered to. Hence, it appears that the refund was paid within four weeks as stipulated by the Tribunal, and there was no delay beyond the specified time limit of three months to entitle the appellants for payment of any interest. Moreover, I do not find from the records any direction by the Tribunal to pay the appellants any interest on the refunded amount.

(3.) IN view of the above, and in view of the fact that interest is payable only if refund is not sanctioned and paid within three months from the date of application, and since under the present law, no refund can be sanctioned without an application being made by the appellants with necessary particulars to prove that no unjust enrichment has taken place, the present appeal claiming interest for a longer period is without any legal basis and the same is dismissed. In the event, after being entitled to a refund by virtue of an Order of the Tribunal, the appellants have applied for the refund with necessary documents and the same has been sanctioned and paid beyond three months, they will be at liberty to claim interest on that ground, and they may make such a claim before the Original Authority as advised.