<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2001 (3) TMI 106 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45930</link>
    <description>Demurrage charged by a Port Trust for cargo left in transit sheds beyond the free period was treated as a statutory levy recoverable under the scale of rates framed under the Major Port Trusts Act. The Madras HC held that overside delivery required removal within the free days, and a strike by trailer workmen did not shift liability to the Port Trust. The record did not show that the importers had arranged vehicles and were prevented by port officials from clearing the cargo. Because demurrage is a statutory charge, the absence of fault by the importers did not, by itself, justify refund. The claim for refund was rejected and the levy was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Jul 2010 16:08:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=84456" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (3) TMI 106 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45930</link>
      <description>Demurrage charged by a Port Trust for cargo left in transit sheds beyond the free period was treated as a statutory levy recoverable under the scale of rates framed under the Major Port Trusts Act. The Madras HC held that overside delivery required removal within the free days, and a strike by trailer workmen did not shift liability to the Port Trust. The record did not show that the importers had arranged vehicles and were prevented by port officials from clearing the cargo. Because demurrage is a statutory charge, the absence of fault by the importers did not, by itself, justify refund. The claim for refund was rejected and the levy was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45930</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>