2016 (10) TMI 296 - HC - Customs

Implementation of order passed by Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) dated 23.12.2015 - redemption fine reduced to ₹ 13,00,000/- and penalty reduced from ₹ 6,00,000/- to ₹ 1,50,000/- imposed on confiscation of gold bars from a Singapore citizen - no stay obtained by the Department to implement the order - Held that - as on date there is no order of stay granted by the Revisional Authority. Therefore, the Department bound to implement the order passed by the first respondent. However, the Court inclined to grant some time to the Department to move an application for stay before the Revisional Authority, if they so desire. The Department granted 45 days time to move a stay application before the Revisional Authority and if they fail to secure any stay or appropriate interim orders, on the expiry of the 45th day, the respondents shall release the gold subject to the petitioner paying the redemption fine of ₹ 6,00,000/- and the reduced penalty of ₹ 1,50,000/- and such release shall be only for re-export and not for clearance. The petitioner shall also file a bond securing the interest of Revenue, in the event they succeed before the Revisional Authority. - petition allowed - decided in favor of Department on fulfilling specified requirements.

Summary

Issues:
1. Implementation of the order passed by the first respondent dated 23.12.2015.
2. Appeal against the order of confiscation and penalty reduction.
3. Revision petition filed by the Department and the absence of a stay order.
4. Grant of time to the Customs Department to move for a stay application.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to implement the order passed by the first respondent on 23.12.2015. The petitioner, a Singapore citizen of Indian origin, failed to declare 1000 gms of gold bars upon arrival at Chennai Airport from Singapore. A show cause notice was issued, resulting in an order of confiscation with an option of redemption, subject to conditions.

2. Both the petitioner and the Revenue appealed against the order. The Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) partly allowed the petitioner's appeal, reducing the redemption fine and penalty but rejected the Revenue's appeal. Subsequently, the Department filed a revision petition against the Commissioner's order, leading to a show cause notice to the petitioner. The petitioner argued that the Revision Application was not maintainable as no stay had been obtained, requesting the release of the gold bars.

3. The Department confirmed filing a revision petition before the Joint Secretary (Revision Application), Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi. As of the current date, no stay order had been granted by the Revisional Authority. The court acknowledged the absence of a stay order and granted the Customs Department 45 days to move for a stay application. If no stay was obtained within this period, the gold would be released for re-export upon payment of the redemption fine and penalty, with the petitioner required to file a bond securing the Revenue's interest.

4. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed on the specified terms, with no costs incurred. The connected miscellaneous petition was closed following the court's decision.