2014 (3) TMI 247 - AT - Customs

Return of sale proceeds of the said confiscated gold to the appellant in terms of earlier decision of tribunal 2010 (10) TMI 650 - CESTAT, MUMBAI - Held that - even though the Tribunal passed the order as early as 28/10/2010 the department has approached the hon ble High Court of Bombay only in August 2012 i.e. almost after a gap of two years. The appeal is yet to be admitted and the current status is pre-admission. Even after the filing of the appeal, 1 years have passed and the department has not initiated any action either to get the order of the Tribunal stayed or the matter decided in their favour. This shows complete inertia on the part of the department in pursuing the matter to its logical conclusion. Department directed to comply with the order dated 28/10/2010 within a period of one month from today or get direction from the hon ble High Court against the order of this Tribunal. If no order is received in favour of the Revenue from the hon ble High Court, the direction of the Tribunal should be complied in toto and action taken accordingly.

Issues:
1. Implementation of Tribunal's order for return of confiscated gold sale proceeds after deducting redemption fine and penalties.
2. Delay in compliance by customs authorities with Tribunal's directions.
3. Appeal filed by Revenue before the High Court against Tribunal's order.
4. Inertia of the department in pursuing the matter.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Implementation of Tribunal's Order
The appellant filed a miscellaneous application seeking the implementation of the Tribunal's order dated 28/10/2010, which set aside the confiscation of gold by the department from the appellant and directed the return of sale proceeds after deducting redemption fine and penalties. The matter was remanded to the Commissioner for quantification of the redemption fine. The Tribunal emphasized that no duty is deductible from the sale proceeds, clarifying the specific instructions for compliance.

Issue 2: Delay in Compliance
Despite the Tribunal's order being issued on 28/10/2010, the customs authorities had not complied with the directions even after more than two years had passed. The Revenue's Rectification of Mistake application was rejected on 28/12/2011. The Tribunal noted the significant delay and lack of action on the part of the department in executing the order, highlighting the non-compliance and inertia in addressing the matter promptly.

Issue 3: Appeal Filed by Revenue
The Revenue had filed an appeal before the High Court of Bombay against the Tribunal's order dated 28/10/2010, which was still pending at the time of the hearing. The department sought time to expedite the appeal process and indicated its intention to comply with the Tribunal's directions upon resolution of the appeal. The Tribunal acknowledged the status of the appeal and the need for the department to pursue the matter diligently.

Issue 4: Inertia of the Department
The Tribunal observed that despite the passage of time and the filing of the appeal by the department in August 2012, no significant progress had been made. The appeal was still at the pre-admission stage, reflecting a lack of proactive steps by the department to seek a resolution. The Tribunal directed the department to either comply with its order within one month or obtain a direction from the High Court. Failure to receive a favorable order from the High Court would necessitate full compliance with the Tribunal's directions.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's judgment emphasized the importance of timely compliance with its orders, highlighted the need for proactive pursuit of legal remedies by the department, and provided clear directions for future actions to be taken in the case.

← Previous Next →