COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS Vs. HOTLINE CPT LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal, the Revenue has contested the correctness of the impugned order vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has reversed the order -in -original of the adjudicating authority and allowed the refund claim pertaining to interest, of the respondents.

(2.) The facts are not much in dispute. The respondents warehoused the imported goods (parts of the colour picture tubes) after executing the necessary bond. The cleared the goods through various Bills of Entry from the warehouse during the period Jan. to Feb. 2004 after paying the duty along with the interest. The interest was paid by them for having kept the goods in the warehouse for a period of more than 30 days as prescribed under Section 61 of the Customs Act as amended vide Notification No. 23/2001 -Cus. (N.T.) dated 22 -5 -2001. Thereafter, they lodged the claim for the refund of the interest on the ground that same was not payable by them as when they warehoused the goods, the period prescribed was six months during which they were required to remove the goods from the warehouse.

(3.) Shri H.C. Verma, Id. JDR has contended that since the period of retention of the goods in the warehouse was reduced to one month w.e.f. 1 -6 -2001 through the above said notification, the respondents were duty bound to clear the goods within that period and for having no done so, they voluntarily rightly paid the interest along with the duty amount. Therefore, no refund of interest could be allowed to them by the Commissioner (Appeals). He has also contended that without challenging the assessment on the Bills of Entries vide which the goods were cleared, no claim for interest paid by the respondents is legally maintainable in view of the Apex Court judgment in case of CCE, Kanpur v. Flock (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2000 (120) E.L.T. 285 (S.C.)].