TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (7) TMI 310
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appeals by this common judgment/order. 2. These appeals pertain to seizure of the polyster fabric imported by the respondent. The aforesaid seizure was made by the appellant at Mumbai and Delhi for want of valid licences. However, subsequently it has been proved and established in these cases, that the consignments of polyster fabric were covered by valid licences and imports were made in accorda....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion that the goods will be sold by the customs department within six months. Similar orders were passed in other cases. These goods were ultimately sold by the customs authorities after a long gap only on 2nd April, 1998. 4. It transpires that when the said goods were in the custody/possession of the appellant under the order of seizure, some of the goods were stolen, which were valued at Rs. 8,3....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dge that the respondent would be entitled to interest @ 7% per annum from the date of the seizure till the date of payment. 5. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the customs authorities have filed the present appeal, on which we have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Basically two issues arise for consideration before us. Firstly, whether the appellant could be made liable to make g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rrage charges. 7. So far as the demurrage is concerned, the order of the Division Bench for sale of the goods was passed sometime in 1987 and 1988. Despite the said orders, the goods were not sold by the customs authorities and ultimately came to be sold only in the year 1998 and in the process demurrage was being charged by the port authority, which is sought to be passed on to the respondent. I....