https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43867 Writ relief against an interest demand on warehoused goods was refused because the petitioners approached the Court after a long delay and had themselves delayed clearance for several years. The Court did not decide the substantive question whether interest was payable where the interest provision came into force after warehousing; instead, it declined to exercise writ jurisdiction in view of delay and laches. The challenge to the demand therefore failed on the threshold ground of unexplained delay, without any ruling on the underlying liability to interest. en-us Mon, 10 Oct 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Jun 2010 15:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43867 Writ relief against an interest demand on warehoused goods was refused because the petitioners approached the Court after a long delay and had themselves delayed clearance for several years. The Court did not decide the substantive question whether interest was payable where the interest provision came into force after warehousing; instead, it declined to exercise writ jurisdiction in view of delay and laches. The challenge to the demand therefore failed on the threshold ground of unexplained delay, without any ruling on the underlying liability to interest. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 10 Oct 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43867