Page 159 - ELT_2nd_15th April 2020_Vol 372_Part

2020 ] OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA 205

(iii) The refund claim filed by M/s. Oil and Natural Gas Corpora-
tion Limited, Head Geophysical Services, Western Onshore
Basin, Makarpura Road, Vadodara-390009 for
Rs. 22,44,88,330.71 (Rupees Twenty Two Crore Fourty Four
Lakh Eighty Eight Thousand Three Hundred Thirty and Paise
Seventy One Only) stands disposed of in above terms.”
10. The aforesaid extracted observation from the order impugned in
this petition would clearly and unequivocally go to indicate that the authority
has held that the petitioners were entitled for refund. The authority has held that
the petitioners were entitled for even interest but the petitioners have, as per the
reasoning of the authority passing the impugned order, failed in establishing that
the duty amount is not based on end- user or consumers.
11. This Court is of the considered view that the process involved in
processing the refund casts serious duty upon the concerned officer to advert to
the facts pleaded before the authority for coming to the conclusion that though
refund is payable but the same is required to be deposited and paid in the Con-
sumer Fund for want of any document or other evidence to indicate that the
payment of refund would not result into “unjust enrichment” to the recipient.
12. We are of the view that the order impugned unfortunately is abso-
lutely silent qua the contention of the ONGC, which on the face of it, indicate
that the machinery in question on which the duty was paid and duty was sought
to be claimed as refund was not in any manner capable of being dealt with in or
passing, so as to pass on the burden of duty to the consumer or end-user as there
was no end-user or customer in the instant case. The authorities in uncanny
avoidance to deal with this aspect has rendered the order vitiated and, therefore,
decision of the authority qua depositing the amount into the consumer fund is
required to be deprecated, quashed and set aside.
13. The question at this stage now arises is as to whether this Court
should order refund along with interest or afford an opportunity to the authority
for deciding the same. We are of the view that the authority may be called upon
to decide the aspect of payment of refund along with interest without further
insisting upon any other material and based upon the material which has already
been submitted and giving liberty to the petitioner to produce any material, if
they so choose, and decide to make payment of refund with appropriate interest
admissible under law within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of writ
of the Court. With this observation, the petition is partly allowed. Rule is made
absolute accordingly with no order as to costs.
FURTHER ORDER
14. At this stage, Mr.Viral Shah, Learned Counsel for the respondent
requested the Court to stay operation and implementation of this order. We are
of the view that looking to the inordinate delay, even in processing refund, re-
quest does not deserve to be accepted. Even otherwise also 30 days’ time is al-
ready granted for undertaking the exercise of processing the refund claim in ac-
cordance with law, after hearing the petitioner herein, therefore, this time is suf-
ficient to take up appeal proceedings, if any. Hence, the request is rejected.
_______

EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th April 2020  175