https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2965 The appeal involved a dispute over the interpretation of Section 61 of the Customs Act concerning warehousing period and interest liability for goods stored in bonded warehouses. The Tribunal ruled that the total warehousing period should determine interest liability to prevent manipulation by importers. However, the longer demand period was deemed unjustified in this case as each clearance was documented within the normal period specified in the Customs Act. The Department's failure to act timely rendered the demand for interest time-barred, resulting in the appeal being allowed with consequential relief. en-us Tue, 25 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2965 The appeal involved a dispute over the interpretation of Section 61 of the Customs Act concerning warehousing period and interest liability for goods stored in bonded warehouses. The Tribunal ruled that the total warehousing period should determine interest liability to prevent manipulation by importers. However, the longer demand period was deemed unjustified in this case as each clearance was documented within the normal period specified in the Customs Act. The Department's failure to act timely rendered the demand for interest time-barred, resulting in the appeal being allowed with consequential relief. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 25 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2965