9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (12) TMI 14X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cise Tariff Act, 1985. Certain goods were imported and enter the territory of India at Chennai port. Under the supervision of the appellant, the goods were transported to Toranagallu where warehouse is situated and from the warehouse the respondent has to clear the goods. 3. The respondent has paid the duty payable on the warehouse goods under Section 61 of the Act. The appellant levied the interest on the ground that the goods were cleared beyond the period prescribed under Section 61(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. The respondent paid the interest demanded by the appellant. Thereafter the respondent preferred four refund claims with the Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bellary, on the ground that the Department has collected excess int ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date on which the goods were deposited physically at Toranagallu and therefore the respondent was entitled for refund of the excess interest paid by them, by its order dt. 19-7-2006. Being aggrieved by the orders of CESTAT of Bangalore the present appeal is filed by the department. 4. According to Mr. Bhaskar, the Tribunal has committed a serious error in not considering the provision of Section 59 of the Act in order to reckon the date on which the interest has to be calculated or to show that the period of one year has to be reckoned. According to him as per Section 59, the goods will be under the control of the Department from the day on which all the goods entered the port at Chennai, since the responsibility of the department would co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7. When the learned counsel appearing for the appellant does not dispute the fact that the physical delivery of the goods to the warehouse was delivered at Toranagallu, we are not in a position to understand how the time to levy interest can be reckoned from the day on which the goods were entered the Port at Chennai. It is no doubt true the goods were under the supervision of the appellant department. But the goods were transported at the cost of the respondent-assessee from Chennai Port to the warehouse of Toranagallu. The actual deposit was made in the warehouse of Toranagallu under the supervision of the Warehouse officer at Toranagallu. On facts we are clear that actually the goods were deposited in the warehouse at Toranagallu and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
