9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (11) TMI 95X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terials. Necessary proceeding was initiated by issuing show cause notice. Petitioner replied to the show cause notice and then adjudication was done by the appropriate authority. Upon adjudication the Item No. 2 of the ceased goods was directed to be released unconditionally. However, the other items being Item Nos. 1 and 3 were confiscated but allowed to redeemed by the petitioner upon payment of penalty of a sum of Rs. 7,500/-. The petitioner ultimately paid that amount of penalty on the one hand and preferred an appeal against the order of the appropriate authority to the CEGAT on the other hand. The learned CEGAT granted relief to the petitioner and set aside the order of confiscation together with order of redemption and payment of pen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t value as far as practicable. He, however, is unable to satisfy the Court as to how the sale was undertaken. He submits that actual price of the goods fetched by sale should be the value of the goods, not the seizure value. So there is no question of paying seizure value of the goods or for that matter of payment of interest. 6.Having heard the respective contentions of the learned Counsels, I think the point which has fallen for consideration of this Court is that whether on the facts and circumstances of the case seizure value of the goods should be given to the petitioner or the value fetched by sale should be appropriate, under law. 7.The admitted position is that the properties were seized and the valuation was arrived at the time o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be paid to the owner of the goods." 8.In this case the goods were not ultimately confiscated, though initially the goods were seized by the Department. In my view, until and unless the entire proceedings came to an end, the Department concerned should have held the goods as a trustee thereof as ultimately the goods were required to be returned to the petitioner either by way of redemption or by unconditional release in terms of the order of competent authority. First order was passed in the year 1992 when Item No. 2 in the seizure list was directed to be released unconditionally and the sale has been held in the year of 1997. In any view of the matter, goods bearing Item No. 2 should have been released immediately as the Customs Authoritie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce in this regard. 9.Mr. Ali has tried to impress upon me that there is no option but to sell the properties as the matter was an old one and the goods could not be traced. In my view, such an explanation is far from satisfaction of the Court. As such, I hold that the petitioner is entitled to get the price of the goods as declared and accepted in the seizure list by the department. Admittedly, the petitioner has been paid a sum of Rs. 27,417/-. Therefore, I direct the Department concerned to pay the sum of Rs. 1,38,233/-. 10.Thus, I set aside and quash all the orders refusing to pay the seizure value of the goods. 11.In the event the aforesaid payment is made within two months from the date of communication of this order, then there w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
