2015 (9) TMI 718 - HC - Customs

Non-service of Notice Storage of goods for extended period Levy of duty Through impugned communication, 1st respondent required petitioner to pay customs duty and interest Petitioner states that impugned communication was not preceded by any notice and representations made by it were not taken into account It is also pleaded that goods are covered by Section 85 of customs Act, 1962 and accordingly are exempted from customs duty Held that - Petitioner stored goods in customs godown by duly executing bonds but had not removed though substantial period has expired Petitioner made representations for extension of warehouse period From perusal of impugned order, evident that respondents wanted to levy customs duty and interest Court of view that impugned communication can be treated as show cause notice by itself and petitioner can be granted reasonable time to put forward its contentions Respondent-1 directed to pass appropriate orders Petition disposed of.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to communication by 1st respondent as illegal, violative of natural justice, and contrary to Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis:
The writ petition challenges a communication by the 1st respondent as illegal, violative of natural justice, and contrary to Section 85 of the Customs Act, 1962. The petitioner, a shipping agent and chandler, imported goods stored in customs godown, required to pay customs duty and interest by the communication. Petitioner claims lack of prior notice and non-consideration of representations. The goods are asserted to be exempt under Section 85 of the Act. The respondents argue that the communication does not constitute an adjudication, allowing the petitioner to make representations. The Court notes the goods stored by the petitioner, cigarettes and liquor, and the dispute over removal within the warehouse period. Previous writ petitions by the petitioner under similar circumstances were disposed of with directions to consider explanations and objections. The Court deems the impugned communication as a show cause notice, granting the petitioner time to present contentions.

The Court finds that the petitioner stored imported goods in the customs godown but did not remove them within the stipulated period, leading to the demand for customs duty and interest. The issue of goods falling under Section 85 of the Act requires further consideration after providing notice to the petitioner. Referring to a previous case, the Court directs the 1st respondent to allow the petitioner to submit remarks or representations within two weeks. The impugned communication is to be treated as a show cause notice, and the 1st respondent is instructed to make appropriate orders based on the petitioner's submissions. The writ petition is disposed of with directions, and pending miscellaneous petitions are also resolved without costs.