Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2009 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (5) TMI 312 - CESTAT, KOLKATAExtension of warehousing periods - we find that the appellants did not apply for extension of the warehousing period to the Commissioner either within the warehousing period or within the period up to which the Commissioner could have extended the same. We also find that the appellants did not apply to the Chief Commissioner for extension of the warehousing period. – On application for extension of period three years after its expiry, Commissioner of Customs (Port) has permitted to clear the goods by paying Customs duty at the rate that prevailed on the date of expiry of warehousing period with interest - Hence, the communication from the department to the appellants asking them to pay duty and interest with reference to the expiry of the warehousing period in March and August, 2001, is, therefore, legal and proper and such communication cannot be considered as granting extension of the warehousing period since the Commissioner had no power to grant extension beyond six months. As such, the order appealed against does not require any interference. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed
|