Air Uk Leasing Ltd. vs Union Of India (Uoi)
2001 Latest Caselaw 760 Del

JUDGMENT

Vijender Jain, J.

1. This is an application filed by the petitioner for release of interest which has accrued on the FDR deposited by the petitioner pursuant to the order passed by his Court on 10-4-1997.

2. On 20-1-1997, division Bench of this Court passed the order for deposit of Rs. 8 crores by the petitioner and further directed the petitioner to furnish bank guarantee in the sum of Rs. 4.50 crores to the satisfaction of Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo Unit, New Delhi undertaking to pay the same in case the petition is ultimately dismissed. While passing that order the Court observed:

"From the material on record, prima facie, it appears that M/s. Modiluft towards Inland Air Travel Tax for the period from March, 1996 to August, 1996, a sum of Rs. 8,65,637.00 was due including therein also a small amount for the month of November, 1995. This amount represented the Travel Tax which Modiluft had collected from the passengers. They were required to file the return and deposit the amount within the stipulated period of thirty days after the end of the month. It is not seriously disputed that this amount was not deposited. There are also provisions for levy of interest and penalty on delayed payments. According to respondents 1 to 3, the total amount due would work out to be about Rs. 12.5 crores inclusive of penalty from June, 1994 to March, 1995 and interest of Rs. 1,04,59,037/- on delayed payment for the period from June, 1994 to February, 1996 and interest liability as had arisen up to 13th January, 1997. These amounts are indicated in annexure R-18."

3. As the petitioner/applicant could not furnish the bank guarantee in view of Section 46 of the FERA the petitioner had approached this Court for modification of order dated 20-1-1997, inter alia, praying that they may be permitted to furnish adequate fixed deposits to the satisfaction of the respondents for an amount of Rs. 4.50 crores. That fixed deposit was made in terms of the order passed by this Court on 10-4-1997.

4. Now, the applicant has approached this Court by way of present application quairelease of interest which has accrued on the fixed deposits made by the applicant. Notice of this application was served on Mr. Hazarika who appeared in and asked for time to file reply. He has not filed any reply. Mr.Hazarika says that he has instructions to argue the matter straight away.

5. Mr. Hazarika learned Counsel for the respondent has argued that as the FDR has been given pursuant to the order passed by this Court, interest accrued on the said FDR not released as the same would ensure to the benefits of the respondents.

6. In view of the specific order passed by the Division Bench on 20-1-1997, inter alia, stating that the total amount due was Rs. 8,65,637.00/- on account of Inland Air Travel Tax and the additional liability which was fastened as per the Annexure R-18 filed by the respondent calculated the component of penalty as well as interest up to date when the order was passed as well as interest up to date when the order was passed by the Division Bench and that is how the total amount came to be Rs. 12.5 crores. There is no justification for holding the interest accrued upon the FDRs on deposit of Rs. 4.5 crores by the petitioner/applicant. Respondents' interest has been adequately safeguarded by deposit of the alleged Inland Travel Tax as well as late payment interest and penalty. I do not see any justification as to why the interest which has accrued on the FDRs of the applicant be not returned to the applicant.

7. The interest accrued on the said FDRs of Rs. 4.5 crores be released to the applicant. I order accordingly.

Application stands disposed of.