Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
Indian Thermoplastics (P) Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Customs on 10 June, 2003
Equivalent citations: 2003(88)ECC489, 2002ECR350(TRI.-DELHI), 2003(155)ELT263(TRI-DEL)
ORDER
K.K. Usha, President
1. The applicant in the above miscellaneous application submits that pursuant to the final order passed by this Tribunal dated 20-6-1996 reported as Indian Thermoplastic (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, Kandla -1996 (87) E.L.T. 536 they are entitled to the return of the following amounts :
(i) Excess customs duty realized by the Deptt. during investigation stages Rs. 5,65,350.00
(ii) Redemption fine Rs. 1,00,000.00
(iii) Penalty Rs. 50,000.00
2. The applicant alleges that in spite of numerous reminders including letters addressed to the Commissioner by name, the amounts as mentioned above are not being returned to the applicant. The applicant further submitted that they are entitled, to return of the amount along with interest. When the application came up for hearing on 22-4-2003 along with similar applications, we passed an order directing the respondent to file an affidavit explaining the delay in not implementing the order passed by the Tribunal. There was direction to refer to the frames of the officers in charge during the relevant period. Pursuant thereto Shri Sahab Singh, Commissioner of Customs, Kandla has filed an affidavit dated 2-6-2003. The deponent does not give the date on which he took charge as Commissioner of Customs, Kandla. He referred to the names and designations of the officers who were in charge during the relevant period. We are not prima facie satisfied with the explanation offered in the affidavit for the inordinate delay in implementing the order passed by this Tribunal on 20-6-96. But from the affidavit it is seen that an amount of Rs. 1,50,000 has been sanctioned on 29-5-2003 which would take in only the redemption fine and penalty. There is no reference made in the affidavit regarding payment of interest on the above amount. As far as the amount of Rs. 5,65,350.00 collected during investigation stages by the Department, it will be seen that there is no order passed for return of the amount. On the other hand, proposal is to deny the same to the appellant on the ground of unjust enrichment.
3. We find no merit in this stand taken by the Commissioner. Amount collected during investigation cannot be treated as duty paid for the purpose of Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962. Applicant is therefore entitled to return of the above amount.
4. We have already taken the view in a number of similar applications that the applicants are entitled to interest on the amount to be returned. Under similar circumstances in Misc. Order No. 78/2003/NB(A) dated 1-5-2003 we have referred to and followed the decision of the Supreme Court in Kuil Fireworks Industries v. CCE - 1997 (95) E.L.T. 3. We therefore direct the respondent to return the entire amount of Rs. 7,15,350 with interest at 12% within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and report compliance on 5-8-2003.
5. The issue regarding delay in implementing the order and fixing responsibility of the same on the officer or officers concerned will be taken up later after issuing notices to those officers who were in charge during the relevant period.
Post the matter to 5-8-2003.