Page 98 - GSTL_23rd July 2020_Vol 38_Part 4

464 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 38
(D) Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India, 2013 SCC
OnLine Guj 1487 (DB) = 2015 (324) E.L.T. 299 (Guj.) where interest @
9% per annum and future interest @ 6% per annum was granted;
and,
(E) Ebiz.com Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & S.T.,
2017 (49) S.T.R. 389 (All.) where costs of Rs. 50,000/- were imposed
on the Department.
20. In the present case, as aforesaid, the amount of Rs. 2,38,00,000/-
was deposited by the petitioner of its own volition, during the au-
dit/investigation, though under protest and the petitioner has not chosen to de-
tail the circumstances in which the petitioner felt compelled to make the deposit.
The petitioner for the first time sought refund of the said amount vide letter dat-
ed 2nd May, 2018.
21. Considering the said facts, we do not find the petitioner entitled to
interest at any higher rate than @ 6% per annum from the date of deposit i.e.
27th October, 2006 till the end of May, 2018 i.e. 31st May, 2018. However, we do
not find any justification for the respondents retaining the said amount thereafter
and find the respondents liable for interest with effect from 1st June, 2018 on-
wards and till date @ 7.5% per annum. While so enhancing the rate of interest,
we have also taken into consideration the non-compliance by the respondents of
the orders of this Court as detailed above, leading to a contempt notice being
issued to the respondents and in response whereto Ms. Niharika Gupta, Assis-
tant Commissioner in the Office of Division-Nehru Place, Central GST, Delhi
East Commissionerate is present in the Court.
22. The respondents are expected to at least now, on or before 15th Ju-
ly, 2020 refund the amount of Rs. 2,38,00,000/- with interest @ 6% per annum
from 1st November, 2006 to 31st May, 2018 and with interest @ 7.5% per annum
from 1st June, 2018 till the date of refund on or before 31st July, 2020. However, if
the said amount is not refunded by 15th July, 2020, the rate of interest with effect
from 1st August, 2020 shall stand enhanced to 12% per annum. A mandamus to
the said effect is issued to the respondents GST Department.
23. We would be failing in our duty, if do not also record another con-
tention of the Counsel for the respondents. It was also the contention of the
Counsel for the respondents that the petitioner had concealed the facts in the pe-
tition, as disclosed in the counter affidavit accompanied with documents. How-
ever, once the respondents are not found entitled to the monies of the petitioner
and/or are found to be unjustifiably retaining the same, the said argument
would not entitle the respondents to appropriate what is not due to them.
24. Having heard Ms. Niharika Gupta, Assistant Commissioner, we are
of the view that no purpose will be served in proceeding with the contempt pro-
ceedings and the contempt notice issued vide order dated 3 March, 2020 is dis-
charged.
25. The respondents having however indulged in frivolous litigation,
are burdened with costs of Rs. 25,000/- payable to the petitioner along with the
amounts with respect whereto mandamus has been issued.
26. The petition is disposed of.

_______

GST LAW TIMES  23rd July 2020  98