2019 (11) TMI 968 - HC - Customs

Imposition of penalty - Seizure of goods - gold/gold jewellery - petitioner submits that the writ petitioner would be satisfied if the aforesaid amount realized by the Customs Department is refunded after deducting ₹ 20,00,000/- penalty that has been imposed on the writ petitioner - HELD THAT - There is no disputation or disagreement before this Court as between both the Learned Counsel that the instant case stands covered by the earlier order and there is no disagreement that earlier order made by a Hon ble single Judge has been given a legal quietus. It has not only been given legal quietus, but has been acted upon and refund after deducting penalty has also been given to the writ petitioner therein pursuant to the earlier order. Fourth respondent is directed to pay to the writ petitioner money realized by selling the consignment seized from the writ petitioner after deducting the penalty of ₹ 20,00,000/- imposed - petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues: Seizure and confiscation of dutiable goods, redemption option, penalty imposition, refund of realized amount after deducting penalty.

Seizure and Confiscation of Dutiable Goods: The writ petitioner arrived at Hyderabad airport from Dubai, where gold/gold jewellery was seized from them. The Customs Department issued an order dated 15-2-2019 confiscating the goods and offering the writ petitioner the option to redeem the consignment for re-export by paying a specified amount. Additionally, a penalty was imposed on the writ petitioner under Section 112A of the Customs Act, 1962.

Redemption Option and Refund: The writ petitioner approached the respondent for redemption, but was informed that the consignment had been sold for an amount of ?2,48,21,820, leading to the closure of the redemption option. The writ petitioner sought a refund of the realized amount after deducting the imposed penalty of ?20,00,000. Reference was made to a previous order by a Single Judge of the Court, which had been legally concluded and acted upon, where a similar refund was granted after penalty deduction.

Court's Decision: The Court directed the fourth respondent to refund the amount realized from selling the seized consignment to the writ petitioner after deducting the penalty amount of ?20,00,000. The total amount realized was ?2,48,28,820. The writ petitioner was instructed to apply for the refund within two weeks of receiving a copy of the order, following applicable rules. The fourth respondent was ordered to process the refund within four weeks of receiving the application. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions, and no costs were awarded.