Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 1]

Gujarat High Court

Commissioner Of Customs vs Pravin R. Ajudiya on 25 July, 2019

Author: J. B. Pardiwala

Bench: J.B.Pardiwala, A.C. Rao

       C/TAXAP/59/2019                                             IA ORDER




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD


          CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR DIRECTION) NO. 2 of 2019
                                In
                    R/TAX APPEAL NO. 59 of 2019
==========================================================

PRAVIN R. AJUDIYA Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS ========================================================== Appearance:

MR PARESH M DAVE for the PETITIONER(s) No. MR DHAVAL D VYAS for the RESPONDENT(s) No. ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.C. RAO Date : 25/07/2019 IA ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA) By this Civil Application, the applicant-original respondent in the Tax Appeal No. 59/2019 has prayed for following reliefs :
"8(A) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the Principal Commissioner /Commissioner of customs,Ahmedabad and also the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Surat to immediately release in the applicant's favour the seized diamonds, which is the subject matter of the main Tax Appeal ;
(B) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the Principal Commissioner /Commissioner of Customs at Ahmedabad and also the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Surat, to forthwith comply with the direction issued vide order dated 8.5.2019 (Annexure I) to Page 1 of 3 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 27 00:50:04 IST 2019 C/TAXAP/59/2019 IA ORDER this application by releasing the seized diamonds in the applicant's favour;
(C) Any other further relief as may be deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also please be granted.

2. It appears that by an order-in-original No. 30/commr/08A/DRI/2014 dated 5.11.2014, the adjudicating authority had ordered absolute confiscation of the seized rough diamonds under the provisions of Sections 111(d), 111(1) and 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962, and imposed penalty of Rs. 45 lakh upon the applicant herein under Section 112(b) of the Act.

3. We take notice of the fact that the Tax Appeal No. 59/2019 is at the instance of the Commissioner of Customs, and the same has been admitted by this Court. Along with the Tax Appeal, Civil Application for stay No. 1/2019 was also preferred. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 8.5.2019, disposed of the Civil Application preferred by the Commissioner of Customs with directions. Para 8 of the order reads as under :

" 8. In light of the above discussion, the application partly succeeds and is accordingly allowed to the following extent :
Pending the department's appeal, the seized diamonds are ordered to be released in favour of the respondent upon the respondent paying redemption fine equal to 10% of the value of goods and fine equal to 1% of the value of the goods and providing a bank guarantee for a sum of Rs.25 lakh to be kept alive till final disposal of the appeal. The respondent shall also file an undertaking before this court that in the event, the applicant succeeds in the appeal and if absolute confiscation of the goods is ordered respondent shall also file an undertaking before this court that in the event, the applicant succeeds in the appeal and if absolute confiscation of the goods is ordered or the respondent is held liable to pay an amount more than Page 2 of 3 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 27 00:50:04 IST 2019 C/TAXAP/59/2019 IA ORDER the amount paid under this order, the respondent shall pay the differential amount that he may become liable to pay under such order."

3. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court referred to above, the bank guarantee, as well as 10% redemption fine has also been deposited along with 1% penalty. The applicant has discharged all the obligations as imposed by this Court in the order referred to above. However, till this date the seized diamonds have not been returned to the applicant. Prima facie, the concerned authority is in contempt. We would like to know the response of the concerned authority.

Let Notice be issued to the respondent, returnable on 1.8.2019.

Direct service is permitted.

(J. B. PARDIWALA, J) (A. C. RAO, J) MARY VADAKKAN Page 3 of 3 Downloaded on : Sat Jul 27 00:50:04 IST 2019