2005 (10) TMI 137

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ., dated 30th September, 2003. The appellants had imported duty free Capital Goods, spares and raw materials by availing exemption under erstwhile Notification No. 13/81-Cus., dated 9-2-1981 as amended. The appellants were permitted to set up 100% EOU by the Department of Industrial Development, Secretariat for Industrial Approvals and the said unit had to discharge export obligation by exporting .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nted in January, 2002. It is the contention of the appellants that the Notification does not provide for confirmation of interest and furthermore, they rely on the ruling of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Kanchanjanga Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs - 1993 (66) E.L.T. 171 (Cal.) wherein it had been held that where the goods were not cleared from the warehouse due to inordinate delay by t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sis of the above submissions recorded. 4. The learned SDR conceded that the Notification No. 67/97-Cus. (NT) dated 1-11-1995 exempts interest accrued on the Customs duty payable on the goods warehoused under Chapter IX of the said Act. However, he submitted that in so far as the delay on the part of the Customs to take a decision, the same has been explained in the impugned order. He distinguish .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X