https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95813 In EPCG imports under Notification No. 160/92-Cus., interest could not be demanded at 24% per annum because the notification then in force contained no express statutory clause authorising interest, and interest could not be inferred from policy documents, handbook conditions, circulars, or the importer's undertaking alone. A later notification introducing an interest provision confirmed the absence of such authority in the earlier regime. On settlement, the applicant's full and true disclosure, part payment of admitted duty, and bank guarantee for the balance satisfied the statutory requirements, so the duty liability was settled at the admitted figure and immunity from fine, penalty, and prosecution was granted for the settled matter. en-us Fri, 23 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Dec 2011 11:53:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95813 In EPCG imports under Notification No. 160/92-Cus., interest could not be demanded at 24% per annum because the notification then in force contained no express statutory clause authorising interest, and interest could not be inferred from policy documents, handbook conditions, circulars, or the importer's undertaking alone. A later notification introducing an interest provision confirmed the absence of such authority in the earlier regime. On settlement, the applicant's full and true disclosure, part payment of admitted duty, and bank guarantee for the balance satisfied the statutory requirements, so the duty liability was settled at the admitted figure and immunity from fine, penalty, and prosecution was granted for the settled matter. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 23 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95813