2018 (6) TMI 1765 - HC - Customs

Maintainability of petition - demand of 50% of the demand amount less the amount already paid by them - HELD THAT - Though the learned counsel for the parties, assailed the correctness of that portion of the order impugned in the appeals, as stated supra and accordingly sought for reversal, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to interfere with the interim direction issued in the year 2013, directing to pay 50% of the demand amount, as the same has not been complied with and consequently, respondents are yet to consider the application, as directed. Both the parties have not complied with the directions issued. Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Writ petitions filed under Article 226 for quashing certain portions of customs manual and orders.
2. Interim order against recovery notice and payment of demand amount.
3. Writ appeals challenging the interim order and application consideration.
4. Disposal of writ appeals and request for expeditious disposal of writ petition.

Issue 1: Writ petitions filed under Article 226 for quashing certain portions of customs manual and orders:
The judgment pertains to writ petitions filed by Sun Global Logistics Private Limited and M/s. Global Logistics Private Limited seeking relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitions aimed at quashing specific portions of the customs manual and orders issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Chennai. The petitions raised issues related to the legality of the orders and sought remedies through writs of certiorari and mandamus.

Issue 2: Interim order against recovery notice and payment of demand amount:
An interim order was passed concerning the recovery notice issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Chennai, directing the petitioner to pay 50% of the demand amount within a specified period. The petitioner challenged this order, alleging violation of natural justice principles and the law of limitation. The court considered the arguments but upheld the interim direction, emphasizing the importance of compliance with the order and the pending consideration of the waiver application.

Issue 3: Writ appeals challenging the interim order and application consideration:
Subsequently, writ appeals were filed by Sun Global Logistics Private Limited and the Union of India challenging the interim order and the direction for considering the waiver application. Both appeals were heard together and disposed of in a common order. Despite objections raised by the parties, the court declined to reverse the interim direction, noting non-compliance by both parties and the pending consideration of the application.

Issue 4: Disposal of writ appeals and request for expeditious disposal of writ petition:
The court dismissed both writ appeals, citing the completion of pleadings and the length of time passed since the interim order. The judgment emphasized the need for expeditious disposal of the writ petition filed in 2014, allowing the parties to present contentious issues before the writ court. No costs were awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed, concluding the legal proceedings.

This detailed analysis covers the key issues addressed in the judgment delivered by the Madras High Court, involving writ petitions, interim orders, writ appeals, and the overall disposal of the legal proceedings.