9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Application for reference under Section 130(1) of the Customs Act for questions of law arising from import of rough marble slabs, seizure of goods, confiscation, and penalties imposed. Analysis: The appellant, a private limited company, imported rough marble slabs under an open general license for sale in India. The goods were imported from Italy through Metal Traders UK Ltd., with shipments starting in February 1984. Some consignments were cleared for home consumption, while others were deposited in a private warehouse without duty payment. However, officers of DRI Mumbai and SHB Customs conducted searches in 1985, seizing marble stock from the warehouse and office premises. The appellant requested grounds for seizure, highlighting legal objections and factual discrepancies related to bill of lading dates, vessel movements, and lack of collusion with suppliers or shipping companies. Despite delays and financial losses, the Collector of Customs issued an order in 1987 confiscating the marble consignments and imposing penalties under the Customs Act. The appellant filed a reference application under Section 130 of the Customs Act seeking clarification on various legal questions arising from the confiscation and penalties imposed. The Tribunal noted the procedural requirements for filing reference applications within 60 days of order service, with provision for condoning a 30-day delay upon showing sufficient cause. An additional submission made beyond the allowed period was rejected for adding new questions without adequate justification. The Tribunal emphasized the need for specific and clearly formulated questions of law for reference to the High Court, citing precedents on question formulation and relevance to legal issues. Upon detailed analysis, the Tribunal allowed the reference application in part, referring questions C to F and H to the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay as requested by the appellant. The questions related to legal contentions and implications arising from the Bench Order and impugned order, while rejecting general or factual questions for reference. The registry was directed to prepare a statement of case encompassing the referred questions along with relevant orders for High Court consideration. In conclusion, the judgment addressed the appellant's legal challenges regarding the import of marble slabs, seizure, confiscation, and penalties, emphasizing the need for specific legal questions for reference applications under the Customs Act. The detailed analysis highlighted procedural requirements, question formulation standards, and the Tribunal's decision to allow partial reference based on the legal nature of the issues raised by the appellant.
|
