MAITHAN CERAMICS LIMITED Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appeal is directed against the rectification order, dated 23.12.2019, passed in Miscellaneous Application No.C/ROM/30328/2019 in Customs Appeal No.30949 of 2018, by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short, 'the Tribunal'), Regional Bench at Hyderabad, wherein the Tribunal rectified its earlier order to the following extent:

(2.) Factual matrix giving rise to the Appeal is to the effect the appellant had appealed before the Office of the Commissioner of Customs, Visakhapatnam (for short, 'the Commissioner') challenging an Order-In- Original, dated 09.09.2005, imposing duty and penalty upon him with regard to incorrect availing of DEPB scrips. During pendency of the Appeal, the appellant had deposited the duty and penalty as per the Order In Original. Upon the Appeal being allowed on 16.09.2006, the appellant sought refund of the duty and penalty along with interest before the Commissioner. The Commissioner allowed refund of the deposit along with interest at the prescribed rate from the date of making the deposit to the date of refund. This order was appealed before the Commissioner of Appeals, who set-aside the interest component ordered in favour of the appellant on the ground that the deposit of duty and penalty made by the appellant is not a pre-deposit in terms of Section 129E of the Customs Act. Appellant filed appeal before the Tribunal, who reversed the order of the first appellate authority and held that the deposit made by the appellant was pre-deposit under Section 29E of the Customs Act, 1962 and interest as applicable on pre-deposit needs to be paid to the appellant. Department, however, filed an application for rectification claiming there were certain errors apparent on the face of the order. After hearing the parties, the Tribunal rectified its own order, holding as follows:

(3.) Against such rectification, the appellant is before this Court.