TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (5) TMI 312
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....001, 23-8-2001 and 31-8-2001 respectively. Before expiry of the warehousing periods, the appellants cleared 25 pallets on payment of appropriate duty of Customs thereon and the remaining 25 pallets continued to remain in the Bonded Warehouse. On 10-6-2004, the appellants requested for extension of the warehousing period of the 25 pallets of bonded goods till 30-6-2004 and requested for clearance of the said bonded goods on or before 30-6-2004. On 17-6-2004, the appellants were informed by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs that "The Commissioner of Customs (Port) has permitted to clear the goods by 30-6-2004 by paying Customs duty at the rate that prevailed on the date of expiry of warehousing period i.e. as on 23-8-2001, 8-9-2002 and 7-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Sunil Jugalkishore Gupta v. Union of India and Others - 1988 (36) E.L.T. 75 (Bom.). It is the case of the appellants that the appellants have been permitted to take clearance of the impugned goods before 30-6-04 and hence, warehousing period comes to an end only on 30-6-04 and the original dates of expiry of the warehousing period are not relevant for determining the duty rate and interest. 5. Heard the ld. DR for the Revenue. He argues that in this case, the appellants did not apply for extension of the warehousing period which lapsed in March and August, 2001. He states that the period for which the goods may remain in warehouse is specified under Section 61 of the Customs Act, 1962 and the Commissioner can extend the same up to six mont....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppellants never approached the Chief Commissioner who is alone vested with the authority to grant extension beyond six months under the said Section 61. 7. We also find that the communication sent after taking approval of the Commissioner is very clear and is to the effect that the appellants are to pay duty and interest due on the date of expiry of the warehousing period which is inconformity with the law of the land laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court by the detailed order in the case of M/s. Kesoram Rayon (supra). The communication from the department cannot be constituted by any stretch of imagination to have the effect of extending the warehousing period since the authority, namely, the Commissioner with whose approval the same was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y are deposited for the period of any year if they are such goods as are referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (1), and for the period of three months counted from the date of the order permitting warehousing if they are not such goods. The first proviso to sub-section (1) contemplates the reduction of the periods aforementioned of one year and three months respectively (now referred to as "the permitted periods"), if the goods are likely to deteriorate. It also permits if the goods are not likely to deteriorate, an extension of the permitted periods on sufficient cause being shown; the Collector of Customs can extend the permitted periods by six months and the Central Board of Excise and Customs can do so for as long as it deems fit. By....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ded is not made, it is recoverable by sale of other goods of the importer in the warehouse. 13. Goods which are not removed from a warehouse within the permissible period are treated as goods improperly removed from the warehouse. Such improper removal takes place when the goods remain in the warehouse beyond the permitted period or its permitted extension. The importer of the goods may be called upon to pay Customs duty on them and, necessarily it would be payable at the rate applicable on the date of their deemed removal from the warehouse, that is, the date on which the permitted period or its permitted extension came to an end. 14. Section 15(1)(b) applies to the case of goods cleared under Section 68 from a warehouse upon presentati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction 68 but under Section 72. While the appellants may have filed an ex-bond bill of entry pertaining to the said bales on 30th May, 1985, there is nothing on record that suggests that clearance thereon under Section 68 was ordered. Section 15(1)(b) has, therefore, no application. 17. The consequence of non-removal of warehoused goods within the permitted period or the permitted extension is, by virture of the terms of Section 72, certain. The date on which it comes to end is the date relevant for determining the rate of duty. When the duty is, in fact, demanded is not relevant. The alternative submission on behalf of the appellants must, therefore, also be rejected." 9. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, l....