https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122798 The appellate authority ruled in favor of the Revenue, holding that the importer was liable to pay the duty and interest as per the double duty bond executed. The department's auction of the goods for non-payment of duty was deemed valid under Section 72(1) of the Customs Act. The importer's argument regarding the bond's lapse and lack of notice before auction was dismissed. The decision emphasized that the demand for dues was sustainable under Section 72(1) for uncleared goods post-warehousing period, directing the Revenue to proceed with recovering the balance dues. en-us Fri, 07 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Aug 2012 12:46:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122798 The appellate authority ruled in favor of the Revenue, holding that the importer was liable to pay the duty and interest as per the double duty bond executed. The department's auction of the goods for non-payment of duty was deemed valid under Section 72(1) of the Customs Act. The importer's argument regarding the bond's lapse and lack of notice before auction was dismissed. The decision emphasized that the demand for dues was sustainable under Section 72(1) for uncleared goods post-warehousing period, directing the Revenue to proceed with recovering the balance dues. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 07 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122798