Commissioner of Customs, Kochi vs Shree Simandar Enterprises

Manjula Chellur, A.C.J.

Heard Learned Counsel for the appellant as well as Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent. The Department at whose instance the judgment came to be passed is before us aggrieved by the review order of the judgment dated 28-3-2012. The judgment dated 28-3-2012 reads asunder:

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking refund of excess fine and penalty consequent to appellate order in which the fine and penalty have been reduced. Learned standing counsel for the Central Board of Excise and Customs submits that the excess fine and penalty consequent on the appellate order would be refunded to the petitioner within 10 days. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to refund the excess fine and penalty consequent to the appellate order to the petitioner within ten days from today.

The review petition came to be filed by the Department contending that unless original challan for paying the penalty amount is produced by the respondent/writ petitioner, it will not be proper on their part to refund Rs. 6,00,000/- (Rupees Six lakhs) and odd, the excess amount to be refunded to the assessee as per the circular at Ext.P3.

The grievance of the appellant review petitioner is, in the address given in the challan, the parties are not residing and the communication returned to the Department with the endorsement "address left". Therefore, the Department had to entertain the doubts regarding the bona fides of the person who approached them, claiming refund, with a photocopy of challan. According to the respondent original challan is misplaced, therefore they are producing the photocopy of the challan claiming refund. It is also brought on record that the unit a proprietory concern, is also closed and therefore the communication addressed to the addressee mentioned in the cause title of the writ petition must have returned as "addressee left".

The grievance of the appellant seems to be genuine, as later, if someone brings the original challan and claims this money, the Department would be in difficulty as there is no time-limit fixed in Ext.P3 for refund. Accordingly, we direct the respondent/writ petitioner to produce the documents pertaining to the identity of the person with correct proof of address and also bank account number along with indemnity bond with an undertaking to the Department so that genuine apprehension expressed by the Department could be satisfied to a large extent. In that view of the matter, we are of the opinion, there cannot be award of 6% interest on the amount to be refunded so also the exemplary cost awarded in the Review Petition deserves to be set aside confirming the payment of refund as directed in the judgment dated 28-3-2012. We modify the review order directing the respondents to do the needful as directed above within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and the Department shall dispose of the matter of refund within next four weeks from the date of receipt of the documents. The Writ Appeal is disposed of as above.