https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175893 Interest on warehoused goods was held recoverable under the Customs Act as a demand under the bond and recovery machinery, and a mistaken statutory reference did not invalidate the proceedings. For ambiguous wording on when interest under section 61(3) began to run, the construction favourable to the assessee was preferred, especially where an earlier public notice supported that basis and later clarification altered it only prospectively. The demands were also treated as time-barred because no express limitation applied, yet recovery had to be initiated within a reasonable time. The department was therefore bound by its earlier representation and could not enforce the revised basis retrospectively. en-us Tue, 28 Feb 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Dec 2015 13:24:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175893 Interest on warehoused goods was held recoverable under the Customs Act as a demand under the bond and recovery machinery, and a mistaken statutory reference did not invalidate the proceedings. For ambiguous wording on when interest under section 61(3) began to run, the construction favourable to the assessee was preferred, especially where an earlier public notice supported that basis and later clarification altered it only prospectively. The demands were also treated as time-barred because no express limitation applied, yet recovery had to be initiated within a reasonable time. The department was therefore bound by its earlier representation and could not enforce the revised basis retrospectively. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 28 Feb 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175893