<?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 (8) TMI 123 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45973</link>
    <description>Warehoused goods cleared after the statutory warehousing period did not attract interest liability under the Customs Act, 1962. The High Court followed binding Supreme Court rulings that importers are not liable to pay interest merely because the goods were exempt from duty at the time of clearance. On that settled legal position, the direction fastening interest could not stand, and the adverse writ order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2010 10:03:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=84499" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (8) TMI 123 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45973</link>
      <description>Warehoused goods cleared after the statutory warehousing period did not attract interest liability under the Customs Act, 1962. The High Court followed binding Supreme Court rulings that importers are not liable to pay interest merely because the goods were exempt from duty at the time of clearance. On that settled legal position, the direction fastening interest could not stand, and the adverse writ order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45973</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>