9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 1404X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er. Accordingly, in the absence of any justifiable material produced by the petitioner to establish as to how the 4th respondent was entitled to demand the Bank Guarantee in a sum of Rs.5,68,16,000/- from the petitioner, the impugned condition in this regard deserves to be quashed. Insofar as the contention urged by the respondents that the petition is not maintainable in view of alternative remedy available by way of an appeal under Section 128 of the Customs Act is concerned, having regard to the findings above that the impugned condition directing furnishing of Bank Guarantee is illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction or authority of law, merely because alternative remedy is available, the said circumstance cannot be made the basi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase of the subject vehicle in favour of the petitioner, subject to the petitioner executing a Bond for the value of Rs.3,40,00,000/- which was the market value of the subject car, the said respondent did not have any jurisdiction or authority of law in directing the petitioner to furnish the Bank Guarantee in a sum of Rs.5,68,16,000/- which is without any basis and without recording any reasons as to why the petitioner as to furnish the Bank Guarantee to the tune of the aforesaid sum and the same being illegal, arbitrary and without any basis, deserves to be quashed. 3.1 In this context, my attention is invited to the show cause notice dated 10.08.2022 issued by the 1st respondent to the petitioner and other persons under Section 124 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e dated 10.08.2022 will clearly indicate that the 1st respondent has come to the categorical conclusion that the petitioner was liable to pay only Rs.2,28,15,790/- together with applicable interest and penalty, which would, at any rate be much lesser than a sum of Rs.5,68,16,000/-, in respect of which, the Bank Guarantee is directed to be furnished by the petitioner. It is also relevant to state that the impugned condition No.2 has been imposed by the 4th respondent is without any basis and without any quantification as to why the petitioner is liable to furnish the Bank Guarantee in respect of the aforesaid sum of Rs.5,68,16,000/- sought to be imposed by the 4th respondent. Further, in Shri.Surya s case supra , under identical circumstanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I hereby order to release the vehicle Range Rover bearing registration No.PB36H0900 provisionally under Section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962 subject to fulfillment of following conditions:- 1. The beneficial owner shall pay the differential duty amounting to Rs.60,13,920/- (Rupees Sixty Lakhs Thirteen Thousand Nine Hundred and Twenty Only). 2. Execute a Bond for Rs.29,48,000/- (Rupees Twenty Nine Lakhs Fourty Eight Thousand only) with an undertaking that they shall pay the duty, fine and/or penalty as may be adjudged by the Adjudicating Authority, subject to appellate provisions under the Customs Act, 1962 as prescribed in para 5 of Circular No.35/2017- Customs dated 16.08.2017. 3. Execute a Bank Guarantee of Rs.1,50 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - and execute bank guarantee in respect of other 50% and shall keep it renewed and valid till final adjudication of case, or in the event of non-renewal of Bank Guarantee as above, the guaranteed amount be credited to the Government account by the bank on its own as prescribed in para 5 of the Circular No.35/2017-Customs dated 16.08.2017. (ii) Shall execute a bond of Rs.29,48,000/- with an undertaking that they shall pay the duty, fine and/or penalty as may be adjudged by the Adjudicating Authority subject to appellate provisions under the Customs Act, 1962 as prescribed in para 5 of Circular No.35/2017- Customs dated 16.08.2017. (iii) The beneficial owner shall not alienate or otherwise encumber the vehicle till the adjudicatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tentions need not be gone into at this stage. 8. In the result, I pass the following:- ORDER (i) Petition is hereby allowed (ii) The impugned condition No.2 (ii) in the provisional release order dated 25.07.2022 directing the petitioner to furnish Bank Guarantee in a sum of Rs.5,68,16,000/- is modified as hereunder:- (a) Petitioner shall pay 50% of Rs.2,28,15,790/- in favour of the 4th respondent within a period of six weeks from today; (b) In addition to the aforesaid payment of 50% of Rs.2,28,15,790/-, the petitioner shall furnish the Bank Guarantee in respect of the remaining 50% and keep it renewed till the final adjudication of the matter by the respondents. (iii) Immediately upon the petitioner complying with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
