9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 1114X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mants. The order of adjudication does not disclose the basis of the valuation of the seized articles and from the order itself, the valuation of the betel nuts at ₹ 47,95,200/- is not discernible. After the seizure is declared to be illegal by the adjudicating authority in absence of any rebuttable evidence and contrary evidence to dislodge the testimony of the witness, I feel that the plaintiff is entitled to a decree for a sum of ₹ 26,65,600/- and accordingly a decree is passed for the aforesaid sums. However, during the pendency of the proceeding the plaintiff has received a sum of ₹ 12,31,200/- on January 18, 2001. The plaintiff shall be entitled to payment of interest at the rate of 8% per annum on and from 1st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so by Superintendent (Adjudication) Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) by a reasoned order dated 24th November, 1999 and consequent upon such adjudication order, the plaintiff is entitled to unconditional release of 33320 kgs. betel nuts valued at ₹ 47,95,200/- in connection with the seizure Case No. 13/IMP/CUS/SLG/DPU/99, dated 7th February, 1999 as was directed by the authority concerned in the final order of adjudication. The Customs Authorities by a letter dated 19th January, 2001 forwarded a cheque for ₹ 12,31,200/- in purported settlement of the plaintiffs claim for release of 33320 kgs. betel nuts valued at ₹ 47,95,200/- and for refund of security deposit amounting to ₹ 40,000/-. The plaintiffs, however, n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. He further deposed that the said amount was calculated at the then prevailing market rate. The plaintiff purchased the betel nuts at the rate of ₹ 125/- or ₹ 126/- per kg. from Dooars Area. He has referred to the money receipt issued by the Regulated Market Committee both dated 5th February, 1999 showing the estimated value of the Articles as ₹ 4,95,000/- and ₹ 4,70,000/- aggregating to ₹ 9,65,000/-. He stated that this money receipts were seized by the Customs Authorities and are mentioned in the Seizure List. The witness had referred to the copies of The Economic Times obtained from the National Library to show that the value of the articles as on 6th February, 1999 would vary between ₹ 127 and ͅ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y discussion on the valuation made by the adjudicating authority as to how it could arrive at such valuation. 6. On the basis of the evidence, it appears that the aggregate value of the goods at the time of seizure could not have been more than ₹ 26,65,600/-. The Seizure List was prepared on 7th February, 1999. The order of adjudication in favour of the plaintiff was passed on 16th December, 1999. The Adjudicating Authority directed unconditional release of 33320 kgs. of betel nuts valued at ₹ 47,95,200/- in favour of the plaintiffs and in case the goods have already been sold by auction, the sale proceeds thereof would be refunded to the rightful claimants. The order of adjudication does not disclose the basis of the valuat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held that the authorities concerned are bound to pay the value of the goods assessed at the time of seizure and not the value which it fetched from the sale of the said goods. After the seizure is declared to be illegal by the adjudicating authority in absence of any rebuttable evidence and contrary evidence to dislodge the testimony of the witness, I feel that the plaintiff is entitled to a decree for a sum of ₹ 26,65,600/- and accordingly a decree is passed for the aforesaid sums. However, during the pendency of the proceeding the plaintiff has received a sum of ₹ 12,31,200/- on January 18, 2001. 8. In view thereof, the plaintiff shall be entitled to payment of interest at the rate of 8% per annum on and from 1st January, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
