Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>CESTAT rules on duty rate for imported goods stored post-bond expiry</h1> The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai, ruled in favor of the Revenue in a dispute over the determination of the rate of duty for imported goods kept in a ... Rate of duty for warehoused goods - Relevant date Issues:- Determination of the date with reference to which the rate of duty is to be decided in the case of imported goods kept in a warehouse beyond the expiry of the bond period.Analysis:The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai, stemmed from a dispute regarding the determination of the rate of duty for 200 bags of Glucona Delta Lactone F 5010 imported by the respondent and warehoused under bond. The respondent failed to ex-bond the goods before the bond's expiry and sought clearance after the validity period. The Department contended that the rate of duty should apply as of the bond expiry date, considering the goods as deemed removed at that point. The adjudicating authority agreed with this view, citing the decision in M/s. Kesoram Rayon v. Collector of Customs, Calcutta. However, the respondent argued that a similar matter involving M/s. Pacific Exports had the adjudicating authority's decision overturned by the Commissioner (Appeals), which the respondent claimed was binding. The Commissioner (Appeals) sided with the respondent, leading to the Revenue's appeal.The Appellate Tribunal, in its analysis, found merit in the Revenue's contention. It held that the Commissioner (Appeals) should have followed the Supreme Court's decision in M/s. Kesoram Rayon, which established that the date of deemed removal for goods kept in a warehouse beyond the bond period is the bond expiry date. The Tribunal referred to a subsequent decision in K.L.J. Plastics Ltd. v. CC Chennai, affirmed by the Supreme Court, reinforcing the principle established in M/s. Kesoram Rayon. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue, emphasizing the importance of applying the legal precedent set by the Supreme Court in determining the rate of duty for goods in such circumstances.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
