9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 644X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isions of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the Settlement Commission, particularly by which the Settlement Commission holds that the petitioner is liable to pay simple interest at 15%. The Settlement Commission rejected the claim made by the petitioner by relying upon the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs (Sea Port) vs. S.R.F. Limited in W.P.No.39535 of 2002 dated 10.09.2003. 3.The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is primarily that Section 28AB of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) was inserted for the first time on 20.08.1996, which provides for interest on delayed payment of duty in special ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5 (179) E.L.T. 386 (Cal.), the Court considered somewhat a similar issue and held that as per Section 127H of the Act, the power of the Settlement Commission is relatable to waiver either partial or full amount of interest under the Act only and in the said case, the importer was and is under obligation to pay interest not under the provisions of the Act, but, under the bond at the rate of 24% in terms of exemption notification and though the bond was furnished in terms of the statutory decision, the contractual character was not destroyed. Further, it was held that the rate of interest of 24% was not the interest chargeable under the Act, but under the bond, which is contractual document in nature and this contractual question has not been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt. In Paragraph 16 it was observed by their Lordships as follows: "...........although the Settlement Commission has levied interest at a percentage, much less than what was agreed to pay by the petitioners in their bond and legal undertaking, the same being not an issue in this petition, we are not expressing any opinion in that behalf." 22. The petitioner took fullest advantage of the exemption notification at the time of assessment and also at the time of payment of other dues. I think it is not the question of co-operation rather under compulsion they were forced to disclose their duty liability to overcome the difficulty of possible prosecution and penalty. The Commission has altogether ignored binding effect of bond given by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
