2019 (7) TMI 1966 - HC - Customs

Absolute Confiscation - Seeking immediate release of seized Diamonds - levy of penalty under Section 112(b) of Customs Act - HELD THAT - A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 8.5.2019 2019 (5) TMI 984 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT , disposed of the Civil Application preferred by the Commissioner of Customs with directions. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court referred to above, the bank guarantee, as well as 10% redemption fine has also been deposited along with 1% penalty. The applicant has discharged all the obligations as imposed by this Court in the order. However, till this date the seized diamonds have not been returned to the applicant. Prima facie, the concerned authority is in contempt. Let Notice be issued to the respondent, returnable on 1.8.2019.

Summary

Issues:
1. Application for release of seized diamonds in Tax Appeal No. 59/2019.
2. Order-in-original for absolute confiscation of seized rough diamonds and penalty imposition.
3. Admission of Tax Appeal No. 59/2019 by the High Court.
4. Disposal of Civil Application for stay and directions given by the Co-ordinate Bench.
5. Non-compliance with the court's order regarding release of seized diamonds.
6. Contempt proceedings initiated against the concerned authority.

Analysis:
1. The Civil Application sought the release of seized diamonds in favor of the applicant, the original respondent in Tax Appeal No. 59/2019. The applicant requested the court to direct the Principal Commissioner/Commissioner of Customs and the Deputy Commissioner of Customs to release the diamonds promptly. Additional relief was also sought as deemed fit by the court.

2. An order-in-original dated 5.11.2014 resulted in the absolute confiscation of the seized rough diamonds under relevant sections of the Customs Act, 1962. A penalty of Rs. 45 lakh was imposed on the applicant. The legal basis for the confiscation and penalty was outlined in the order-in-original.

3. Tax Appeal No. 59/2019 was filed by the Commissioner of Customs and admitted by the High Court. Alongside the appeal, a Civil Application for stay was submitted. The Co-ordinate Bench of the Court, through an order dated 8.5.2019, provided specific directions regarding the release of the seized diamonds pending the appeal process.

4. The Co-ordinate Bench's order required the release of the seized diamonds upon compliance with specified conditions, including payment of redemption fine, penalty, and providing a bank guarantee. The applicant fulfilled these obligations as directed by the Court. However, the seized diamonds were not returned to the applicant, indicating potential non-compliance by the concerned authority.

5. In response to the apparent non-compliance, the Court initiated contempt proceedings against the concerned authority. A notice was issued to the respondent, with a returnable date set for 1.8.2019. Direct service was permitted to ensure timely communication of the court's directives.

In summary, the judgment addressed the application for the release of seized diamonds, the order-in-original leading to confiscation and penalty imposition, the admission and proceedings of Tax Appeal No. 59/2019, the directions given by the Co-ordinate Bench, the alleged non-compliance with court orders, and the initiation of contempt proceedings to address the issue of seized diamonds not being returned despite the applicant fulfilling the court's requirements.