9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 641X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mation to the Petitioner is also contrary to law. Clause 3.1.2 of the Circular dated 6th September, 2022 would, therefore, have no application in the present case. The entire process followed by the Customs Department for the disposal of the detained gold, collecting the redemption fine and penalty as also deducting customs duty before payment of the value of the detained gold to the Petitioner would, therefore, not be tenable. This Court is of the opinion that the Petitioner is entitled to the entire value of the detained gold as on the market rate prevalent today, which would be liable to be paid by the Customs Department within a period of three weeks. If the said amount is not paid within three weeks, costs of Rs. 1,00,000/- would be liable to be paid by the Customs Department to the Petitioner - Registry is directed to communicate this order to the OSD (Legal), Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs (CBIC) through email ([email protected]) for necessary information and compliance. Conclusion - i) The disposal of the gold was unlawful and not communicated properly to the Petitioner. ii) The Petitioner was entitled to the full value of the detained gold at the current marke ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... W.P. (C) No. 6690/2023 titled Gor Sharian vs. Commissioner of Customs (Airport) New Delhi & Anr., wherein vide order dated 20th July, 2023 the following directions were passed: "3. According to the petitioner, although the redemption fine as well as penalty have been duly deposited, the gold chain has neither been released nor has the petitioner been permitted to receive the same for re-export. 4. Mr. Ojha, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, on instructions submits that there appears to be an issue of some discrepancy in the total deposit made by the petitioner and the amounts which were otherwise payable in terms of the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). 5. If that be the only issue which survives, let the respondents communicate to the petitioner the shortfall, if any, in respect of the deposit which is stated to have been effected in terms of the aforenoted order within a period of one week from today. 6. Subject to the petitioner making good any shortfall that may be indicated, the seized gold chain may thereafter be released and the petitioner's prayer for permission for re-export be processed and disposed of in light of the order of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enior Standing Counsel for the Customs Department. The ld. Counsel submits that there was an error by the Customs Department in this case as the Order-in-Appeal allowing release of the detained goods was not communicated to the Department concerned. It is also submitted that the gold detained from the Petitioner, actually stood disposed of on 29th November, 2022 along with various other gold items which were detained/confiscated. 9. Upon a query from the Court as to whether any intimation was given to the Petitioner prior to the disposal of the detained goods, an undated letter has been handed over to the Court on behalf of the Customs Department, which is extracted below: 10. A perusal of the above letter would show that the Petitioner's Passport number and e-mail id are mentioned therein. However, there is no clarity as to how this letter was communicated to the Petitioner. There is no copy of the e-mail communicating the said letter to the Petitioner attached to this letter handed over by the ld. Counsel for the Customs Department. It is noted that the letter also is signed by an official, whose name is not clear and along with the signatures, the date 7th November, 2022 has b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er realizing the redemption fine which has been deposited along with the penalty. (vii) To further compound the irregularities, the impugned Corrigendum Order is then issued, holding the Petitioner liable for customs duty, further reducing the amount payable in the following terms: "Refund of Rs. 29,46,139/- (Twenty Nine Lakh Forty Six Thousand One Hundred Thirty Nine Only) in lieu of re-export of the confiscated gold after realizing the applicable duty of Rs. 20,68,565/-, Redemption fine of Rs. 4,60,000/- and penalty of Rs. 4,60,0001- and order to pay an amount of Rs. Rs. 29,46,139/- (Twenty Nine Lakh Forty Six Thousand One Hundred Thirty Nine Only) to the applicant-Authorized representative through RTGS against Cheque No. 604894 Dated. 01.2025 issued to PNB, Sansad Marg, New Delhi." 14. The above conduct of the Customs Department is completely unreasonable, arbitrary and untenable. The Ld. Counsel for the Department has relied upon a Circular dated 6th September, 2022, which prescribes the manner in which the gold has to be returned. The relevant paragraph of the said Circular is extracted hereinbelow: "3.1.2 Whenever seized gold has to be returned on account of any order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Petitioner is entitled to the entire value of the detained gold as on the market rate prevalent today, which would be liable to be paid by the Customs Department within a period of three weeks. If the said amount is not paid within three weeks, costs of Rs. 1,00,000/- would be liable to be paid by the Customs Department to the Petitioner. 20. It is made clear that no duty would be liable to be deducted from the said payment of the value of the detained gold as the Petitioner has already deposited the redemption fine and penalty in terms of the Order-in-Appeal. 21. The said amount shall be credited to the Petitioner's bank account directly. The Petitioner shall provide his bank details to the official concerned from his registered Email:- [email protected]. Mr. Gibran Naushad, ld. Senior Standing Counsel shall ensure that the Petitioner speaks to the official concerned before the remittance is paid. 22. In addition, the Customs Department shall ensure in future that the intimation of disposal of detained or confiscated property is given to the concerned party both via email as also the mobile number, so that the said party who has succeeded in Court or Tribunal against the dete ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
