2021 (7) TMI 1108 - HC - Customs

Finalization of assessment order - grievance of respondent/writ petitioner has been that the appellants are not giving effect to the decision of the Appellate Tribunal in M/S. GLOBAL INDUSTRIES VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS COCHIN 2011 (2) TMI 742 - CESTAT BANGALORE - HELD THAT - The appellants inform this Court that the appeal filed against Ext.P9 order is pending before the Supreme Court. It is not in dispute that the appeal is pending and the appellants do not have an order of stay in their favour against the implementation of the decision of the CESTAT. The undisputed fact situation is that the Supreme Court has not stayed the operation or implementation of decision of the CESTAT. The appellant is under obligation to implement the order of the CESTAT and ought to have complied with the writ of mandamus issued by this Court - Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues: Implementation of decision of the Appellate Tribunal, Compliance with writ of mandamus, Pending appeal before the Supreme Court

Implementation of decision of the Appellate Tribunal:
The judgment involves a situation where the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) directed the appellants to allow clearance within three days based on the transaction value. The appellants filed a review petition, which was dismissed. The writ petition was filed to implement the final order within 15 days. The Supreme Court did not stay the operation of the CESTAT decision, and the appellants were obligated to comply with the writ of mandamus issued by the High Court. The Court found no reason to admit the appeal and dismissed the writ appeal, emphasizing that implementation of the order is subject to further orders of the Supreme Court in the pending Civil Appeal.

Compliance with writ of mandamus:
The grievance of the respondent was that the appellants were not giving effect to the decision of the Appellate Tribunal. The writ petition sought a mandamus to implement the final order within a specified timeframe following a previous order. The appellants informed the Court that their appeal against the previous order was pending before the Supreme Court. Despite the pending appeal, the Court highlighted that the appellants did not have a stay order in their favor and were obligated to implement the CESTAT decision as per the writ of mandamus issued by the High Court.

Pending appeal before the Supreme Court:
The appellants had an appeal pending before the Supreme Court against a previous order. The Court noted that the appeal was pending and that there was no stay on the implementation of the CESTAT decision. The appellants were reminded of their obligation to comply with the CESTAT order and the writ of mandamus issued by the High Court. The Court dismissed the writ appeal, clarifying that any steps taken in compliance with the previous orders were subject to further directions from the Supreme Court in the pending Civil Appeal.