AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P.K. Misra, J.—The petitioner has prayed for issuing Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the order of the second respondent dated
24.9.2002 and directing the first respondent to pay the interest of Rs. 1,47,798/-.
The facts giving rise to the present writ petition are as follows:
On 27.11.1989 the authorities under the respondent had seized Indian Currency Notes worth Rs. 4,25,000/-. Subsequently, the Commissioner of
Customs passed an order for confiscation of gold bars and currency notes and imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/-. The petitioner carried the
matter in appeal. By order dated 17.1.2000, the Appellate Tribunal while upholding the direction regarding confiscation of gold bar and imposition
of penalty of Rs. 1,00,00/-, directed to return the currency notes worth of Rs. 4,25,000/-. During pendency of the appeal, the petitioner had made
a pre-deposit of Rs. 25,000/-. Subsequently the petitioner filed Miscellaneous Application No. 104/2000 in C.A. No. 220/91 before the Tribunal
praying for implementation of the final order dated 17.1.2000 and to return the amount along with the interest at the rate of 24% from the date of
seizure. On 23.11.2000, the Appellate Tribunal passed an order directing the authorities to ""return the amount of Rs. 4,25,000/- along with interest
@ 12% per annum as has been directed in the cited judgment within 1 month from the date of receipt of this order"". Subsequently, the Department
after adjusting the pre-deposit amount of Rs. 25,000/- towards penalty and further adjusting the balance sum of Rs. 75,000/- payable towards
penalty, refunded a sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- along with a further sum of Rs. 33,278/- towards interest. Subsequently a petition was filed by the
petitioner contending that the interest should be calculated at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of seizure of the currency notes and not
from the date when the amount was deposited by the Department in the treasury. The aforesaid contention was rejected by the Tribunal on
24.9.2002, which held that the interest amount has been rightly calculated.
During pendency of the writ petition, petitions to amend the prayer in the writ petition and to implead the proposed second respondent has been
filed and they are allowed.
A perusal of various orders indicate that at the time of dismissal of the appeal there was a direction for refund of Rs. 4,50,000/-, but there was
no specific direction that such amount should be refunded with interest from the date of seizure. However, on the basis of the subsequent
application, the Tribunal had directed for payment of the amount along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. It must be construed that at least
from the date of disposal of the appeal interest on Rs. 4,25,000/- should be calculated. The liability to pay the amount arose on the date when the
appellate order was passed if not earlier and there was no justification for the respondents to retain the money thereafter.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that interest should be calculated from the date of deposit had been made. For the aforesaid
reason, he placed reliance upon the decision reported in Kuil Fireworks Industries Vs. Collector of Central Excise and another, . That case related
to the case of return of pre-deposit made and is not comparable to the present case, where the amount has been seized and directed to be
confiscated. The right to get back the money only flows from the appellate order. Therefore, according to me, the interest is payable from the date
of the appellate order.
For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is allowed in part and the respondents are directed to calculate the interest at the rate of 12% per
annum on Rs. 3,50,000/- from the date of disposal of the appeal till the date of payment order and if any further amount is found due, such amount
should be paid within a period of one month from the date of the present order. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are
closed.