9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (6) TMI 295 - HC - CustomsDuty demand - Compliance to legal provisions not made before making demand - Held that - Respondents are to issue a show cause notice and comply with the provisions of law. Equally if they are empowered to seize the goods they will have to comply with the law. If the provisions of law enable them to seize the goods, then, they must comply with such provisions and procedures prescribed therein before effecting seizure. If the law contemplates release of the goods after such seizure even that opportunity should be given to the Petitioners. Needless to state that in all such events the Respondents shall comply with the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 and the requisite Rules thereunder. - Petition disposed of.
Issues: Compliance with due process of law, issuance of show cause notice, seizure of goods, compliance with court orders
Compliance with Due Process of Law: The judgment revolves around the compliance with due process of law by the Respondents, as highlighted in the earlier Writ Petition. The Petitioners expressed concerns that the Respondents might not follow the due process of law regarding duty payment and penalty imposition. The Respondents assured compliance with the Rule of Law in an affidavit filed during the earlier Writ Petition. However, the Petitioners suspected that the Authorities approached FICCI to secure the demand without following the due process. An additional affidavit by the Petitioners detailed how the Authorities communicated with FICCI regarding duty payment. The Court noted that the Respondents did not issue a show cause notice despite the court order and found their actions unsatisfactory. The Court emphasized the importance of complying with the Rule of Law and court orders, directing the issuance of a show cause notice within a week, failing which the Respondents' legal rights would be forfeited. Issuance of Show Cause Notice: The judgment addressed the failure of the Respondents to issue a show cause notice despite the court order and the Petitioners' concerns. The Court emphasized the necessity of issuing a show cause notice as per the provisions of the law. It criticized the Respondents for directly approaching the Guarantor (FICCI) without following the due process and not respecting the court orders. The Court directed the Respondents to issue a show cause notice within a week to safeguard the legal rights of the Petitioners. Seizure of Goods and Compliance with Law: Regarding the seizure of goods, the Court highlighted the importance of complying with the law and the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. The judgment emphasized that if the law empowers the Authorities to seize goods, they must adhere to the prescribed procedures before effecting any seizure. The Court also mentioned that if the law allows for the release of seized goods, the Authorities should provide that opportunity to the Petitioners. It stressed the need for the Respondents to comply with the Customs Act, 1962, and its relevant Rules in all actions related to the seizure or release of goods. The judgment concluded by disposing of the Writ Petition without any costs, emphasizing the significance of compliance with due process of law, issuance of show cause notices, and adherence to court orders and legal provisions in matters related to duty payment, penalty imposition, and seizure of goods under the Customs Act, 1962.
|
