2022 (1) TMI 1409 - AT - Customs

Request to put on hold the re-export of gold of the applicant - HELD THAT - After the matter was reserved for orders on 07.12.2021 and the said letter was filed by the learned Counsel for the appellant the Departmental Representative also sent a letter dated 13.12.2021 including additional submissions received from Air Cargo (Export) New Delhi vide their letters dated 12.12.2021 and 13.12.2021. A perusal of those documents shows that the ownership of subject goods were a matter of dispute before the Dept Recovery Appellate Tribunal according to which the goods do not belong to the appellant at all and they belong to M/s Vee ESS Jewellers (to whom the appellant had exported the goods but who has not cleared them from customs) and that M/s Vee Ess Jewellers have hypothecated them to State Bank of India. Along with these documents vide the aforesaid letter Authorised Representative has also submitted that allowing the re-export will frustrate the claims of the contending parties on the title of the goods . It is deemed appropriate that before for pronouncing the orders with respect to the compliance of the above mentioned final order and the miscellaneous order the aforesaid two letters submitted by Departmental Representative and the letter given in the record cases should be shared with the other side - learned Authorised Representative and learned counsel are directed to provide the aforesaid letters to the opposite side - matter thereafter be re-heard and compliance matter on 4th April 2022.

Summary

Issues: Compliance of Final Order and Miscellaneous Order

Comprehensive Analysis:

Issue 1: Compliance of Final Order and Miscellaneous Order
The judgment addresses the non-compliance of Final Order No. 71733-71742/2019 dated 12.09.2019 and Miscellaneous Order No. 70056/2021 dated 17.11.2021. The Revenue presented a letter dated 2.12.2021 stating that the re-export of gold was put on hold based on legal advice from the Additional Solicitor General of Allahabad High Court. The appellant's counsel alleged that the Customs Commissioners were not willing to comply with the Tribunal's directives and requested action against the officers violating the orders. The Departmental Representative submitted additional documents indicating a dispute over the ownership of the goods, claiming they belonged to a different entity, M/s Vee ESS Jewellers, who had hypothecated them to State Bank of India. The Department argued that allowing re-export would impact the claims on the goods' title. As a result, the Tribunal directed both parties to share the submitted letters and any other necessary documents, allowing for replies and further document submissions. The matter was scheduled for re-hearing on 4th April, 2022 to address compliance issues effectively.

This detailed analysis provides insights into the legal proceedings concerning the compliance of the Final Order and Miscellaneous Order, highlighting the conflicting claims over ownership and the necessary steps taken by the Tribunal to ensure a fair hearing and resolution of the matter.