9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Release of goods under invoicing of consigned goods, Assessment of umbrella panels consignments, Similar orders in previous cases, Execution of bond for release of goods, Wharfage rent exemption, Customs authorities' right to initiate proceedings, Discharge of Bank Guarantee. Analysis: 1. Release of goods under invoicing of consigned goods: The judgment addresses the issue of under-invoicing of consigned goods. The Customs Authority acknowledged that no evidence was found against the concerned individuals regarding under-invoicing. The Customs Authority sought permission to initiate proceedings if any information arises in the future regarding under-invoicing. The Court considered this aspect and disposed of the writ application based on the submissions made by both parties. 2. Assessment of umbrella panels consignments: The judgment mentions the provisional assessment of umbrella panels consignments done by the Customs Authority upon the execution of a P.D. Bond by the parties obtaining orders from the Court. For individuals not obtaining any Court order, the goods are released on the execution of a bank guarantee equivalent to 20% of the declared C.I.F. value. The Court directed the Customs Authority to release the consignment subject to the writ petitioner executing a bond as directed. 3. Similar orders in previous cases: The judgment highlights that numerous cases involving the release of umbrella panels have been presented in the Court over the past two years. The Court noted that orders similar to the one in the case of Suresh Kumar Banthia v. Collector of Customs have been passed by different judges, and no distinct orders were produced by the Customs Authority. The decision in the mentioned case was followed in the current judgment due to the lack of contrary orders and the absence of evidence against the concerned individuals. 4. Execution of bond for release of goods: The Court allowed the writ application, directing the Customs Authority to release the consignment of umbrella panels upon the writ petitioner executing a bond in favor of the Collector of Customs Calcutta. The nature of the bond was to be indicated by the Customs Authority within 48 hours of the order. Upon compliance with the bond requirements, the Customs Authority was instructed to release the goods to the writ petitioner. 5. Wharfage rent exemption: The judgment granted a wharfage rent exemption to the petitioners at the time of goods' release, with the condition that any payable rent would be adjusted subsequently by the authorities. The writ petitioner agreed to pay the rent if found payable at a later stage. 6. Customs authorities' right to initiate proceedings: The judgment clarified that the decision to release the goods did not prevent the Customs authorities from conducting inquiries or initiating proceedings against the firm or the writ petitioner, including issuing show cause notices, if there is sufficient material to do so regarding under-invoicing. 7. Discharge of Bank Guarantee: The Court noted that a Bank Guarantee had been furnished by the writ petitioner as per an earlier order. However, with the current order for release upon executing the P.D. Bond, the Bank Guarantee was discharged, relieving the petitioner from that obligation. 8. Costs and Compliance: No costs were imposed by the Court, and all parties were directed to act based on a xerox signed copy of the minutes of the order. This judgment provides a detailed analysis of the issues surrounding the release of goods, assessment procedures, previous case precedents, bond execution, rent exemptions, authorities' rights, and discharge of obligations, ensuring a comprehensive resolution of the matter at hand.
|
