Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2021 (11) TMI 1175

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as miscellaneous order of this Tribunal, as mentioned above, have not been complied with by the department despite the time bound directions and despite that their interest has duly been taken care of. This act of department is highly unacceptable and unreasonable/ unjustified too - Clearly, it is a case of the officers illegally holding on to the goods of the appellant for over two years after the Final Order of 12.09.2019 as there is no provision in the Customs Act or Rules or Regulations under which the officers could have held on to the goods of the appellant which were not confiscated at all. The Respondent Principal Commissioner of Customs, NOIDA and Commissioner Customs (Exports), IGI Airport, New Delhi are directed to strictly co .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... levant extract from the order dated 21.06.2021, the implementation whereof is prayed is as follows: 6. The applicant prays that since no stay has been granted they may allowed to export their jewellery as per the Final order of this Bench. They had submitted a letter dated 25 September 2019 through their Advocate to the Commissioner of Customs (Export), Air Cargo, New Customs House, IGI Airport, New Delhi requesting him to allow reexport of the said jewellery. In reply, Additional Commissioner (Adjudication), sent vide his letter dated 10 December 2019 a copy of the letter which they had sent to Additional Director, DRI for necessary action. The applicant submits that they were given to understand that the Commissioner of Customs will .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ms (Export), Air Cargo Complex, New Delhi with a copy of this Order and keep the Bank Guarantee alive till the disposal of the appeal filed by the Department before the Hon ble High Court of Allahabad. On submission of the Bank Guarantee, the Commissioner of Customs (Exports), IGI Airport, New Delhi shall within 10 days from the date of receipt of the Bank Guarantee, permit reexport of the jewellery as per the Final Order dated 12.09.2019 of the Tribunal. The submission of the Bank Guarantee shall be subject to the Order to be passed by the High Court . 6. The appellant submitted the Bank Guarantee as was ordered but the Respondents still did not implement the Miscellaneous order dated 21 June 2021. Therefore, this Miscellaneous appli .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... reason for non implementation of the said order. b) Thereafter, on an application under Rule 41 of CESTAT Procedure Rules by the appellant, order dated 21 June 2021 was passed directing the appellants to submit a Bank Guarantee which must be kept alive till the disposal of Revenue s appeal by the High Court and the Respondents were directed to allow export of the goods within 10 days of submission of such Bank Guarantee. Thus this order has also very cautiously taken care of Revenue s interest if its appeal before Hon ble High Court of Allahabad is allowed. c) We also note that the impugned order of the lower authority whereby gold jewellery was ordered to be confiscated and allowing redemption after paying redemption fine was set as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o be the first step to confiscation. So when the order of confiscation is set aside, the order of seizure cannot survive. The legal implication of this is that without any order of seizure or confiscation, respondents are holding on to the goods of the petitioner. Such holding on is clearly without any authority of law and per se illegal. In fact such an action may amount to deprivation of the petitioner of his property without any authority of law and thus violative of Article 300A of the Constitution of India. In the present case no order stands as of now for confiscation of the seized gold/ jewellary which was owned by the appellant and was exported to be received by M/s Vee Ess Jewellers for job work. The said consignee has not come f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates