9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Withholding of goods imported by the petitioner by the first respondent in violation of the order of the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise. 2. Classification and clearance of imported photocopiers under CTH 84433100 by the petitioner. 3. Confiscation of goods by the Assessing Officer due to lack of a license possessed by the petitioner. 4. Appeal under Section 128 of the Customs Act against the Assessing Officer's order. 5. Notice issued by the second respondent for sale of goods in public auction if not cleared by payment of charges. 6. Delay in releasing goods by the first respondent despite orders of the appellate authority. 7. Appeal filed by the first respondent to the Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) against the appellate order. Analysis: 1. The petitioner imported photocopiers and filed a Bill of Entry for clearance, claiming classification under CTH 84433100 for multifunctional machines at a concessional duty rate. The Assessing Officer confiscated the goods, citing lack of a license, and imposed a redemption fine and penalty. The appellate authority later reduced the fine and penalty amounts. 2. The first respondent, despite the appellate authority's revised orders, did not release the goods, leading to the petitioner approaching the High Court. The first respondent's argument that the Revenue's interests justify the delay in releasing the goods was not accepted by the Court. 3. The Court directed the first respondent to release the goods within one week upon payment of the revised redemption fine and penalty determined by the appellate authority. The petitioner's liability would be subject to any orders passed by CESTAT in the appeal filed by the first respondent, ensuring the petitioner's right to prompt relief without undue delay.
|
