9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (11) TMI 262X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against Order-in-Appeal Nos. 39-42/2003, dated 13-5-2003 by which the Commissioner (Appeals) has held that they were liable to pay interest up to the date of payment of duty. 2. When the matters were called no one was present on behalf of the Appellants. These appeals had been adjourned from time to time on the request of the Appellants and as the matter is in very narrow compass we take up the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny interest thereafter does not arise. The Additional Commissioner had rejected their refund claim holding that from 1-6-2001 they were required to pay interest after one month of in-bonding period in view of Notification No. 23/2001-Cus., dated 22-5-2001. The Asstt. Commissioner also gave his finding that the interest is payable up to the date of ex-bonding i.e. the removal of the goods from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . As the goods had been removed by the Appellants from the warehouse after the period when the amended section came into force they were liable to pay interest at the time of removal of the goods as per the amended section. The amended Section has not been given retrospective effect as the Appellants had removed the goods after 1-6-2001 and the interest is payable on the amount of duty payable at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
