TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (1) TMI 530
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed by the importer without having to pay interest on duty for a specified period. On expiry, the goods shall ordinarily be removed on payment of duty without interest. However, interest will have to be paid for any period of overstay of the goods in the warehouse. The interest shall be paid at such rate as specified under Section 47 of the Act. Originally, the warehousing period was one year, which was reduced to six months and further reduced to 30 days. The goods imported by the respondents remained warehoused for a fairly long period beyond the warehousing period and it was during this period of overstay of the warehoused goods that the above amendments were brought to Section 61 of the Act. Dispute arose between the Department and respondent. According to department, the reduced warehousing period of 30 days would be applicable to goods which continued to be warehoused as on 1/6/2001. According to the importer, the law as it stood on the date of warehousing of the goods would continue to govern the warehousing period. Despite this dispute, in two cases of warehousing, the importer paid the interest in terms of the departmental view. Lateron, they filed refund claims and the sam....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....coming to a conclusion that the issue of interest free warehousing period was settled by the Apex Court by virtue of the above cited case law when in fact the Court has not made any observation nor came to any conclusion about the interest free warehousing period" 5. We have heard Mr.A.P.Srinivas, learned counsel for the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Coimbatore and perused the materials available on record. 6. In Union of India Vs. Bangalore Wire Rod Mill {1996 (83) ELT 251 (SC)}, the Hon'ble Apex Court held as follows:- "3. For a proper appreciation of the questions arising herein, it is necessary to state a few more facts: on the date of warehousing the goods, the rate of customs duty chargeable on the imported goods was forty per cent ad valorem. The rate of duty was being raised from time to time and on September 9, 1988, the date on which the goods were cleared from the warehouse, the rate of duty was ninety per cent. The Act, as in force at the relevant time, permitted an importer either to clear the goods immediately on their import or to warehouse them without paying the duty. The warehousing of the goods without paying the duty was, however, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....per annum as is for the time being fixed by the Board, shall be payable on the amount of duty on the warehoused goods for the period from the expiry of the period of one year or as the case may be, three months, till the date of the clearance of the goods from the warehouse: Provided that the Board may, if it considers it necessary so to do in the public interest, by special order and under circumstances of an exceptional nature to be specified in such order to whole or part of any interest payable under this sub-section in respect of any warehoused goods. We have referred to sub-section (2) of Section 61 for the reason that it was relied upon by the appellant before us, though, in our opinion, it is not really relevant herein as we shall point out presently. 4. In this case, the respondent did execute a bond as contemplated by Section 59 (1) while warehousing the goods on November 11, 1982. Though the period of three years prescribed in Section 61 (1) (a) was reduced to one year by an Amendment Act with effect from May 13, 1983, neither the respondent cleared the goods nor the authorities issued a demand notice within one year from May 13, 1983. Only on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mand. The notice prescribed fifteen days for payment. Interest is chargeable only thereafter as held by the High Court, which, in our opinion, is a reasonable way of understanding the provision. Secondly, we see no justification or legal basis for the appellants plea that the interst must be paid taking the rate of the duty at ninety per cent for the said entire period. As a matter of fact, the rate of duty on the said goods was not ninety percent throughout the period March 22, 1985 to September 9, 1988. It was varying. The High Court's direction, therefore, to take the actual rate in force from time to time is a reasonable one. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the judgment of the High Court does not call for any interference. The appeals are accordingly dismissed." 7. In Commissioner of Customs, Chennai Vs. Lakshmi Electrical Control Systems Ltd., {2016 (336) ELT 619 (Mad)}, after considering the Circular No.475/39/90-Cus.VII, dated 8/8/1990, at paras 8 to 10, observed as hereunder:- "8. But, we do not think that the learned Senior Panel Counsel is correct. The correct expression used in Section 27 (1) is 'interest, if any, paid on such duty'. The Ci....