Union of India (Uoi) and ors. vs Mafatlal Fine Spinning & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. and anr.
- SCC(1998) 8 SCC 462
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a provisional assessment has been superseded by a final assessment, the writ petition challenging the demand raised under the provisional assessment becomes infructuous and the appeal thereon should be disposed of. Upon disposal of the appeal arising from the final assessment, if the assessee is found due any amount, it shall be payable with interest at the rate stipulated in the interim order of the High Court from the date of that order until payment; if the assessee is found entitled to refund, the refund shall carry interest at the same rate from the date of original payment until refund, subject to any interim order of the appellate court and subject to applicable statutory provisions regarding unjust enrichment.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
3. We do not propose to state the facts leading up to this stage for the reason that there is a good amount of controversy as to correct factual situation between the counsel before us. Suffice it to say the following: When a demand was raised by the authorities for payment of duty in accordance with the alleged provisional assessment, the assesses-manufacturer went to the Bombay High Court and obtained stay on 19-6-1989. The order was to the effect that the assessee shall keep the bank guarantees alive for six months after the disposal of the petition and that if he fails in the writ petition, he will pay interest at the rate of 18% per annum on the sum found payable.
4. Now it is brought to our notice that on 12-3-1993, a final assessment has also been made against which appeal is pending in the Tribunal (Bombay Bench). On account of the assessment having been made, the provisional assessment must be deemed to have become unnecessary and therefore the writ petition which was directed against a demand raised pursuant to such alleged provisional assessment also becomes infructuous; so does this appeal. We think it appropriate in the circumstances to direct that in case the assesses is found due in any amount as a result of the order of the Tribunal in the said appeal, the assessee shall pay the said amount along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from 19-6-1989 up to the date of payment -- subject of course to the interim order, if any, by this Court. If, however, the assessee is found entitled to refund of any amount as a result of the Tribunal's order in the said appeal, it is obvious that he shall be entitled to refund of that amount at the same rate of interest from the date of payment up to the date of refund, subject, of course, to the plea of unjust enrichment based on the 1991 amendment, to the Central Excises Act. We express no opinion on the applicability or otherwise of the said Amendment Act herein.
5. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
6. No costs.
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free