Calcutta High Court
Pramod Kumar Nathani vs Union Of India & Ors on 25 February, 2009
Author: Soumitra Pal
Bench: Soumitra Pal
WP No. 152 of 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
PRAMOD KUMAR NATHANI
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
For Petitioner : Mr. R. K. Chowdhary, Advocate
For Respondent : Mr. S. Chatterjee, Advocate
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL Date : 25th February, 2009.
The Court: Let affidavit of service filed in Court be kept on record. In the writ petition, the petitioner, stated to be engaged in the business of import and export and stated to have been issued with IEC Code by the competent authority, has prayed for a direction upon the respondents, particularly the Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata and the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Appraising Group III, the respondent nos. 2 and 3 respectively to act in accordance with the provisions of Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1962 and to permit provisional assessment and clearance of the imported consignments of the petitioner under Bill of Entry No.455947 dated 11th February, 2009. An 2 interim order has also been prayed for a direction upon the respondents for permitting provisional clearance and release of the imported consignments in question.
It has been stated that the petitioner is engaged with the import of Glass Beads (Semi Finished) from China and in the last three years, that is, since 2006 several consignments of such goods have been imported by the petitioner and the department has permitted provisional assessment and release of the said goods against PD Bond and security deposit.
Statement has been made that the Glass Beads imported in bulk are semi- finished products and are not meant for retail sale. However, such goods are sold by the petitioner to a particular manufacturer of goods of finished Glass Beads at Firozabad.
It has been stated that on 29th January, 2009 the respondent no.2 had issued a notice calling upon the petitioner to justify the value of the goods which has been alleged to be on the lower side compared to the NIDB data.
Submission has been made that by letter dated 2nd February, 2009, as it appears from the writ petition, the petitioner has replied to the same and a request was made before the respondent no.2 to release the consignments as per earlier practice and to make final assessment.
Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and considering the prayer for release of the consignments, I dispose of the writ petition by directing the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Appraising Group III, the respondent no.3 to make assessment of the goods and release the same provisionally after taking samples within a week from the date of communication of this order subject to the petitioner furnishing bank guarantee of any nationalized bank and PD Bond to the satisfaction of the Customs Authorities. 3
Since the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage without calling upon the respondents to file affidavits controverting the allegations made in the writ petition, the allegations made are deemed not to have been admitted by them.
No order as to costs.
Learned advocates for the parties are permitted to take down the gist of this order for communication and the parties shall act on the basis of such communication.
Urgent certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on priority basis.
(SOUMITRA PAL, J.) sm.
Asst.Registrar [ C. R. ]