TMI Blog2004 (11) TMI 417X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Respondent. [Order per : P.S. Bajaj, Member (J)]. In this appeal, the challenge has been made by the Revenue to the impugned order-in-appeal vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has reversed the order-in-original raising demand of interest from the respondents on the alleged delayed payment of the duty. 2. The facts are not much in dispute. The respondents presented three Bills of En ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he interest. The learned SDR has also reiterated this very ground and referred to TR-6 challans showing the payment of duty in respect of the above said Bill of Entries, and presentation of the same after the delay of five days, seven days and ten days respectively. Therefore, the demand of interest has been rightly raised by the Revenue. But, we are unable to subscribe to this contention of the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at later dates could not be taken to be the dates of the payment, especially when Section 47(2) of the Customs Act, does not state so. The Section only mandates, as observed above, that payments shall be made by the importer within two days from the date of return of the Bill of Entry after assessment to him. The payments as observed above, were made by the respondents within two days by presenti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he above said view after referring to the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of K. Saraswathy v. P.S.S. Somasundaram Chettiar, 1989 (40) S.C. 527 (sic.) and Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay South v. M/s. Ogale Glass Works Ltd., AIR 1154 SC 429. 5. In view of the discussion made above, we do not find any illegality in the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) who had rightly dro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
