9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Challenge to order of Collector of Customs and Appellate Tribunal regarding import of almonds under a replenishment license, imposition of redemption fine and penalty, applicability of judgment in SVA Udyog Viniyog Ltd. case, reduction of redemption fine and penalty based on previous judgment, refund of excess penalty amount, and direction for payment of additional sum. Analysis: The petitioner challenged the order of the Collector of Customs and the Appellate Tribunal regarding the import of almonds under a replenishment license. The Collector of Customs concluded that the imported goods did not qualify as "seeds" as endorsed in the license, leading to confiscation under relevant customs laws. A redemption fine of Rs. 18 lakhs and a penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs were imposed. The Appellate Tribunal upheld the Collector's decision, emphasizing that the import did not align with the license terms and justified the fines based on the goods' value and quantity. The petitioner cited a Division Bench judgment in SVA Udyog Viniyog Ltd. case, which addressed a similar issue of almond import under a replenishment license. The Division Bench reduced the redemption fine and penalty to 50% in that case. The Supreme Court also upheld this decision, emphasizing that the imported goods were not suitable for germination or plantation, falling outside the seed category. The petitioner had paid half of the fines as per the Division Bench order in a previous appeal. Considering the precedents and the petitioner's compliance with the previous order, the High Court found no merit in the current petition. However, based on the SVA Udyog Viniyog Ltd. case, the redemption fine was reduced to Rs. 9 lakhs, and the penalty was reduced to Rs. 1 lakh. The court directed the respondents to refund the excess penalty amount of Rs. 1 lakh, which had been deposited since 1991. The court also ordered the respondents to pay an additional sum of Rs. 4 lakhs to the petitioner due to the prolonged holding of the excess amount. In conclusion, the High Court disposed of the writ petition, specifying the revised redemption fine and penalty amounts, refund of excess penalty, and the additional sum to be paid to the petitioner. The respondents were directed to make the necessary payments within a specified timeline, considering the extended duration of the case.
|
