9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 480X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... failed to satisfy the investigation as to whether it had procured OWC from the seller. Two testing laboratories opined against appellant exhibiting the goods attempted to be exported were MOP. While interest of farmers has suffered, Exchequer has also suffered. Added to that, interest of the economy has also suffered. While financial hardship is plea of appellant in one hand, protection of interest of Revenue is of paramount importance on the other. - it may be said that the appellant causing serious prejudice to Revenue making attempt to export MOP, does not appear to unduly suffer by present predeposit order. - appellant to make pre-deposit ₹ 20.00 Lakhs (Rupees twenty lakhs) as against earlier order for making pre-deposit of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant took undue advantage of such subsidised price and procured the MOP to export the same and make ill gain at the cost of the farmers and exchequer defeating public interest. Accordingly, penalty of Rs. 50,00,000/- was also imposed on the appellant under section 114 (i) of Customs Act, 1962. 3. Record reveals following material facts: (i) The MOP bags were not warehoused for examination but loaded in containers by the CHA and Exporter to avoid detailed examination, of Customs Authority at ICD, Dadri. No chemical examination report was submitted by appellant. Its CHA submitted a fax copy of Meterials Data Safety Sheet showing the goods as Potassium Chloride whereas that was found to be MOP from test reports of two a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... III, as amended vide Notification No.3/2009-2014 dated 27.08.2009 issued form file No.01/91/171/16/AM10/Export Cell. There were no materials on record to show that the appellant had imported the subject goods. (vi) Appellant neither adduced any evidence to show purchase of OWC Drilling Chemical Additive from any seller nor it had any manufacturing unit or facility to manufacture the so alled OWC Drilling Chemical Additive . Appellant also failed to provide chemical composition of the goods attempted to be exported suppressing material facts. 4. Moving the stay application, appellant submitted that the goods worth Rs. 2.00 Crores having been seized and confiscated, there may not be direction for any pre-deposit of penalty at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... per CRCL and SIIR Laboratory. Therefore, appellant s grievance that it has suffered from financial hardship due to confiscation is of no relevance to law when it attempted to export restricted goods. Appellants lost its right over smuggled goods having been confiscated absolutely. Accordingly, direction for pre-deposit cannot be ruled out to protect interest of Revenue. 8. Heard both sides and perused the record. 9. Prima facie, the goods attempted to be exported were MOP as exhibited by report of two laboratories and other material facts and evidence on record. The offending goods were notified to be prohibited goods as per Notification No.30(RE-2003) 2002-2007 dated 28.01.2004 of DGFT issued under file No.01/91/180/1100 AM-02/PC-III ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave come across cases where the collection of public revenue has been seriously jeopardised and budgets of Governments, and Local Authorities affirmatively prejudiced to the point of precariousness consequent upon interim orders made by courts. In fact, instances have come to our knowledge where Governments have been forced to explore further sources for raising revenue, sources which they would rather well leave alone in the public interest, because of the stays granted by Courts. We have come across cases where an entire Service is left in a stay of flutter and unrest because of interim orders passed by courts, leaving the work they are supposed to do in a state of suspended animation. We have come across cases where buses and lorries are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inst public authority. But since the law presumes that public authorities function properly and bona fide with due regard to the public interest, a Court must be circumspect in granting interim orders of far reaching dimensions or orders causing administrative, burdensome inconvenience or orders preventing collection of public revenue for no better reason than that the parties have come to the Court alleging prejudice, inconvenience or harm and that prima facie case has been shown. There can be and there are no hard and fast rules. But prudence, discretion and circumspection are called for. There are several other vital considerations apart from the existence of a prima facie case. There is the question of balance of convenience. There is t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
