2021 (4) TMI 183 - HC - Customs

Attachment of Bank Accounts - Duty Drawback - service of Order-in-Original - change of address - HELD THAT - The petitioner must have written to the second respondent about the change of address and requested the second respondent to send communications in future to the said address. Such an exercise was not undertaken by the petitioner. The third respondent is directed to withdraw ₹ 98,857/- from the petitioner's bank account and remit the same to the second respondent. This amount will be adjusted towards pre-deposit that the petitioner has to make for filing the statutory appeal. The petitioner is said to have received on 26.03.2021 the impugned Order-in-Original dated 22.09.2020. The petitioner shall file an appeal within a period of sixty days therefrom - Since the amount of ₹ 98,857/- from out of the petitioner's account is going to be retained and paid to the department, the impugned communication attaching the petitioner's bank account with the third respondent is quashed. Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to enforcement of order of assessment for duty of Drawback amount, interest, and penalty due to non-receipt of Order-in-Original by the petitioner.

Analysis:
The petitioner contested the enforcement of an order of assessment dated 22.09.2020, demanding payment of &8377; 9,88,569/- for duty of Drawback amount, along with interest and penalty. The Customs authority proceeded with enforcement and attached the petitioner's bank account with the third respondent due to non-questioning of the order in the prescribed manner or obtaining an interim order. The petitioner's primary contention was that the impugned Order-in-Original was never served upon them.

Upon examination, it was revealed that the Order-in-Original was dispatched to the correct address on 16.10.2020 but was returned with the endorsement "No such person." The petitioner claimed to have relocated due to business loss and provided a new address. However, the Court noted that the petitioner failed to inform the second respondent about the change of address or request future communications to be sent to the new address, as required by law.

The Court referred to Section 153 of the Customs Act, which outlines various modes for the service of notices, orders, etc. It was acknowledged that the Customs Department adhered to the statutory requirements for service of communication. Consequently, the Court opined that the petitioner must fulfill their obligations and directed them to remit 10% of the amount demanded, totaling &8377; 98,857/-, for filing a statutory appeal.

In light of the petitioner's undertaking to remit the specified amount and file an appeal within sixty days of receiving the Order-in-Original, the Court directed the third respondent to withdraw the said sum from the petitioner's bank account and remit it to the second respondent. The impugned communication attaching the petitioner's bank account was quashed, and the writ petition was allowed on these terms, with no costs imposed. The outcome of the appeal would determine the rights of the parties involved.