2010 (12) TMI 381 - SC - Customs

Demand - Renewal of bank guarantee - Time limitation - all the contentions that could be raised by the appellant before the Adjudicating authority could again be urged which shall be considered afresh by the Adjudicating Authority and thereafter pass a fresh order in accordance with law giving detailed reasons for its decision - the appellant shall keep the bank guarantee alive till the adjudicating proceeding is completed - The appeal is disposed of

Summary

Issues:
1. Adjudication proceeding under Section 28 of the Customs Act
2. Enforcement of the order passed in the adjudication proceeding
3. Appellant's submission on the limitation issue
4. Directions to raise all issues before the Adjudicating Authority

Adjudication proceeding under Section 28 of the Customs Act:
The Supreme Court heard an appeal filed by the appellant against the judgment and order of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court. The High Court had directed the respondents to adjudicate on the duty payment for consignment exported by the appellant and to maintain a bank guarantee during and after the adjudication. The appellant was directed to appear before the Adjudicating Authority without a final order being passed until leave from the Court was obtained. The Court permitted the Adjudicating Authority to issue an order but not enforce it until further orders. An application by the Union of India seeking execution of the order was rejected.

Enforcement of the order passed in the adjudication proceeding:
The appellant had filed a Writ Petition in the Bombay High Court allowing export upon furnishing a bank guarantee for the full import duty. Export was made following the High Court's order, with the bank guarantee still active. Although the adjudication proceeding was completed with an order, enforcement was pending as per the Court's directions. The appellant argued that the adjudication proceeding was barred under Section 28 of the Customs Act.

Appellant's submission on the limitation issue:
The appellant contended that the adjudication proceeding was barred under Section 28 of the Customs Act. The Court allowed the appellant to raise all issues before the Adjudicating Authority, including the issue of limitation, which was not considered in the previous order. The Adjudicating Authority was directed to consider all contentions afresh and pass a fresh order with detailed reasons. The parties were scheduled to appear before the Adjudicating Authority for a hearing date.

Directions to raise all issues before the Adjudicating Authority:
Considering the issues raised by the appellant, the Court allowed the appellant to raise all issues before the Adjudicating Authority to address concerns, including the issue of limitation. The Adjudicating Authority was instructed to consider all contentions afresh and issue a new order in accordance with the law. The appeal was disposed of with the condition that the bank guarantee must be maintained until the adjudication proceeding is completed. The Court clarified that no opinion was expressed on the merits of the issues or the adjudicating proceeding.