2014 (9) TMI 578 - HC - Customs

Release of confiscated goods - The petitioner says that while the appeal was pending, the authority concerned had sold the seized goods and precisely for such reasons the said authority is showing reluctance in addressing the prayer made by the petitioner for return of the seized goods. - Held that - the action of the authority concerned, being the respondent No. 2 herein, in withholding the seized goods and not returning the same to the petitioner after the order of the assessing authority was set aside by the appellate authority, is not proper and cannot be justified. - department directed to release the goods - Decided in favor of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Petitioner assailed inaction on authorities in not releasing confiscated goods.

Analysis:
The petitioner was apprehended with gold biscuits, leading to a proceeding where the assessing authority found the petitioner guilty. The appellate authority affirmed this, but the Tribunal later allowed the appeal, setting aside the assessing authority's order. The petitioner sought return of seized goods after succeeding in the appeal, claiming the authority sold the goods during the pending appeal.

Mr. Saraf, for the department, did not dispute the appellate authority's decision setting aside the assessing authority's order, indicating the proceeding against the petitioner was dismissed. The Court found it unjust for the authority to withhold the goods. Citing precedent, the Court highlighted the obligation to return seized goods or pay their market value if proceedings favor the owner.

The petitioner's counsel referenced a Supreme Court case emphasizing the obligation to preserve seized property until final confiscation order. The Court deemed the authority's action of withholding the goods post-appeal unjustifiable. Consequently, the respondent authority was directed to return the exact quantity of gold or its equivalent money within three weeks.

Additionally, the respondent authority was instructed to reimburse the petitioner's deposited amount with interest as per the Commissioner's order. With these directions, the writ petition was disposed of, with no costs imposed.