2014 (2) TMI 831 - AT - Customs

Permission to take vessel outside India - Inspite of compliance with the direction and conditions of the Stay order, it is submitted that the Customs Authorities are not permitting the appellant to take the vessel out of India for executing certain urgent work for which they had got - Held that - all proceedings pursuant to adjudication order have been stayed by this Tribunal and, therefore, the Customs authorities cannot refuse to release the vessel or allow the vessel to be used by the appellant as they wish. However, no written order passed by the Customs Authorities has been placed - Commissioner (AR) directed to ascertain the facts and inform this Tribunal on or before 24.01.2014 - If the Customs do not want the appellant to take vessel out of India, they should pass a written order stating the reason therefor and cannot pass any oral instructions - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues: Customs Appeal Stay Order Compliance

Compliance with Stay Order:
The appellant, represented by Ms. Lakshmi Menon, complied with the conditions of the Stay order issued by the Tribunal, which included maintaining a Bond and Bank Guarantee. Despite compliance, the Customs Authorities are allegedly not allowing the appellant to take the vessel out of India for urgent work. The appellant seeks suitable directions from the Customs authorities in this regard.

Stay Order by Tribunal:
The Tribunal had passed a Stay order dated 17.05.2013, staying all proceedings following the adjudication order. As per this order, the Customs authorities are not permitted to withhold the vessel or restrict its use by the appellant. However, the Tribunal notes the absence of any written order from the Customs Authorities regarding the restriction on taking the vessel out of India.

Directions to Customs Authorities:
In response to the appellant's plea, the Tribunal directs the Commissioner (AR) representing the Revenue to investigate the matter and provide necessary information to the Tribunal by a specified date. The Customs Authorities are instructed to issue a written order if they intend to prevent the appellant from moving the vessel out of India, emphasizing that oral instructions are not acceptable. The Tribunal schedules a compliance hearing for further action on the matter.

Conclusion:
The judgment concludes with an order for immediate action ("Order be given Dasti"), indicating the urgency and importance of resolving the issue promptly. The Tribunal's focus on ensuring compliance with the Stay order and the rights of the appellant in utilizing the vessel for urgent work is evident throughout the detailed analysis of the case.