2011 (2) TMI 871 - AT - Customs

Miscellaneous application - Appellant submitted that on 15.2.11, the Hon ble High Court had dismissed the appeal and application, but because of lack of time the order could not be dictated and it was dictated on 17.2.11. The learned Counsel also submitted that the Superintendent representing Kandla Customs House was also present in the Court - The Revenue did not inform the final decision of the Hon ble High Court even though it was pronounced to learned Commissioner and it is also strange that the Superintendent, Customs who was present, did not choose to inform his superiors about the decision - This gives an impression that the Commissioner is interested in prolonging the implementation of the decision of this Tribunal - This attitude is against the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court and as well as instructions issued by CBE&C which requires to implement the decisions of the Tribunal, unless a stay is obtained - Now, that the matter stands decided by Hon ble High Court, the Commissioner is directed to implement the decision of this Tribunal within a week and report compliance.

Summary

Issues: Lack of communication regarding High Court decision, delay in implementing Tribunal order, non-compliance with Supreme Court decision and CBE&C instructions.

In this case, the main issue arose when the learned Counsel for the Revenue failed to inform the final decision of the Hon'ble High Court to the Tribunal, even though it was pronounced on 17.2.11. This lack of communication led to a delay in implementing the Tribunal's order. The Tribunal noted the surprising and strange behavior of the officers involved, including the Superintendent of Customs, for not informing their superiors about the High Court decision. The Tribunal expressed concern that this attitude indicated a desire to prolong the implementation of the Tribunal's decision, which goes against the directives of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the instructions issued by CBE&C.

The Tribunal emphasized the importance of promptly implementing decisions of the Tribunal unless a stay has been obtained. Given that the matter had been decided by the Hon'ble High Court, the Tribunal directed the Commissioner to ensure the implementation of the Tribunal's decision within a week and report compliance. The Tribunal scheduled a follow-up hearing to ascertain compliance on 4.3.2011. This decision highlights the significance of timely and effective communication, as well as the obligation to adhere to legal directives and decisions without unnecessary delays.