<?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 (1) TMI 183 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50502</link>
    <description>The appeal focused on the levy of interest on warehoused goods cleared at nil rate of duty under Advance Licences after the expiry of the warehousing period. The Customs Authorities contended that interest was payable as the warehousing period had expired, but the appellants argued that since the goods were cleared free of duty, no interest should be charged. The Member (J) relied on Supreme Court decisions to conclude that interest on warehoused goods is linked to duty payable, and if no duty is payable, no interest should be charged. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the impugned orders were set aside in favor of the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Aug 2010 11:14:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=88982" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (1) TMI 183 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50502</link>
      <description>The appeal focused on the levy of interest on warehoused goods cleared at nil rate of duty under Advance Licences after the expiry of the warehousing period. The Customs Authorities contended that interest was payable as the warehousing period had expired, but the appellants argued that since the goods were cleared free of duty, no interest should be charged. The Member (J) relied on Supreme Court decisions to conclude that interest on warehoused goods is linked to duty payable, and if no duty is payable, no interest should be charged. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the impugned orders were set aside in favor of the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50502</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>