9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (3) TMI 57X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... S $ 22,500.00 for hardware and US $ 60,000.00 for software, which worked out at Rs. 7,16,974.00 for hardware and Rs. 19,11,930.00 for software. The officers of the Customs Department raided the premises of the importer. One of the documents seized was a proforma invoice dated 27-12-94. It showed a total price of US $ 82,500.00 and discount of US $ 39,325.00. The breakup value of hardware and software was not separately given. The Commissioner of Customs by his order dated 31-5-1995 rejected the discount of US $ 39,325.00 and enhanced the value of the imported goods to US $ 1,21,825.00. It is not disputed that these goods imported by the petitioner were evaluated by the Customs of the value of Rs. 34,65,000.00. These goods were confiscated b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fiscated under this Act, such goods shall thereupon vest in the Central Government." 7.Therefore, according to the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner after confiscation, the goods became the property of the Central Government. During the pendency of the petitioner's appeal, without any permission of the court, the confiscated goods were auctioned in a clandestine manner by the respondents. The respondents are obviously under an obligation to compensate the petitioner for the grave loss which has been caused to him. The goods were evaluated by the petitioner at Rs. 19,11,930.00 and Rs. 7,16,974.00. The total amount worked out to be Rs. 26,28,904.00. This is the declaration of the petitioner though the respondents have eva ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y Rs. 33.04 lakhs and as the duty and the Warehousing charges payable are more than the said amount, the applicant is not entitled to recover anything from the respondent. What is over-looked by the learned Counsel is the consequence of setting aside the order of confiscation on the ground that it was illegal. The applicant has become entitled to the value of the goods as on the date or time when the goods ought to have been cleared by the respondent for home consumption. If the value of the goods in India after importation and payment of duty, in January, 1989, was Rs. 33.04 lakhs only then the applicant, and for that matter any sensible person, would not have imported the goods at all. It would be reasonable to presume that an importer wo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cations as in any case the applicant is entitled to return the money value of the goods which were illegally confiscated by the respondent. Even though the applicant has claimed interest @ 21% we do not think it proper to award interest at such a high rate and considering the facts and circumstances of the case it would be in the interest of justice if the respondent is directed to return the amount of Rs. 33.04 lakhs with interest at the rate of 12% from 1-2-1989 till the date of payment as the Collector by its order dated 31-1-1989 had held that the goods were properly described and the import was legal." 8.We are of the considered opinion that during the pendency of the appeal confiscated goods could not have been auctioned without the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
