2003 (8) TMI 60

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....h which we need not concern ourselves. The main issue centres around the notice of demand issued on 5-7-1991 whereunder a demand was raised on the petitioner by the Revenue authorities in respect of the custom duty as well as interest payable on the custom duty. It is the contention of the respondents that interest on custom duty was payable by the petitioner for the period 16-6-1989 to 5-7-1991, in the first instance and thereafter, from 5-7-1991 till the date the goods were cleared from the warehouse. The Customs authorities by virtue of the said notice of demand dated 5-7-1991 computed the interest on customs duty for the first period i.e. 16-6-1989 to 5-7-1991 at Rs. 2,22,808/-. For the subsequent period, the notice of demand indicated ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he notice of demand." In the present case the only difference is that the notice of demand does not specify any period within which the amount mentioned in the demand is to be paid. In such a situation, it is to be construed that the amount specified in the notice of demand would become payable immediately, i.e., on the date of the notice of demand, which is 5-7-1991. 4.The present case is entirely covered by the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Bangalore Wire Rod Mill (supra). Accordingly, the notice of demand, to the extent it raises a demand of interest for the period 16-6-1989 to 5-7-1991 will have to be set aside. This is so because no amount would be due until the notice of demand was issued and served upon....