1994 (4) TMI 76 - HC - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Contesting orders passed by the Customs, Excise, and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal regarding penalties imposed on two petitioners.
2. Appeal for modification of orders to adjust the pre-deposited amount towards penalties.
3. Refusal by the Tribunal to modify the earlier orders.
4. Consideration of refund of the pre-deposited amount if goods remain with the department.
5. Adjustment of the amount lying in deposit with the Collector of Customs towards the amount required to be deposited under the Tribunal's orders.
6. Observations regarding the release of reasoned orders by the Tribunal.

Analysis:
The High Court of Delhi addressed a Writ Petition filed by two petitioners challenging penalties imposed by the Customs, Excise, and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal. The Collector of Customs levied penalties on the petitioners and their partners, leading to an appeal to the CEGAT. The Tribunal initially directed the petitioners to pre-deposit a specific amount towards penalties. Subsequently, the petitioners sought modification of the orders, highlighting the pre-deposited amount with the Collector of Customs that had not resulted in the release of goods. The Tribunal rejected the modification request despite arguments presented by the petitioners regarding adjusting the pre-deposited duty amount towards penalties.

The Court considered the possibility of refunding the pre-deposited amount if the goods remained with the department and the petitioners provided an undertaking not to remove the goods. The Court found it unnecessary for the petitioners to go through the refund and redeposit process if they were willing to give such an undertaking. While not affirming the right to seek an adjustment of the pre-deposit, the Court, in the interest of justice, ordered that the amount lying in deposit with the Collector of Customs should be treated as part of the amount required to be deposited under the Tribunal's orders. The petitioners were directed to deposit the balance amount as per the Tribunal's orders after deducting the amount with the Collector of Customs, with a one-month deadline provided for the deposit.

Furthermore, the Court expressed concerns about the Tribunal's practice of releasing reasoned orders after the operative part, causing inconvenience to parties and the Revenue. The Court referenced a directive from the Supreme Court deprecating such practices and emphasized that the Tribunal should provide its entire order promptly without separating the operative portion and reasons. The Writ Petition was disposed of accordingly, with the Court issuing orders for the adjustment of the deposited amount and urging the Tribunal to adhere to the directive regarding the release of orders.