2001 (9) TMI 218 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues: Interpretation of Section 61(2) of the Customs Act regarding payment of interest for warehoused goods detained by customs authorities.

Analysis:
1. The Commissioner of Customs dropped charges of undervaluation and non-production of license but directed the appellant to pay interest at 24% p.a. under Section 61(2)(ii) of the Customs Act for the goods imported. The appellant argued that the goods were detained by customs authorities, preventing clearance from the warehouse.
2. The appellant contended that the detention of goods was due to customs authorities' actions, not their inaction. They referenced the case of Kanchanjanga Pvt. Ltd. v. CC and Priyanka Overseas Pvt. Ltd. v. UOI to support their argument that interest under Section 61(2) is unjustified when goods are detained due to delays by customs authorities.
3. The JDR argued that Section 61(2) mandates interest payment for warehoused goods beyond six months, with no exception for goods detained due to customs proceedings.
4. The Tribunal analyzed the case in comparison to Kanchanjanga Pvt. Ltd. and noted that interest under Section 61(2) does not apply when goods are detained due to customs inaction. Referring to the High Court's decision, the Tribunal set aside the Commissioner's order on interest payment, granting relief to the appellant.

This detailed analysis highlights the key arguments, legal references, and the Tribunal's decision regarding the interpretation of Section 61(2) of the Customs Act in the context of interest payment for detained warehoused goods.