JUDGEMENT
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J. -
(1.) By this writ application the writ petitioner,
an exporter, has challenged the authority of the respondent No. 3 to seize bank
account opened by the petitioner for the purpose of realisation of drawback
amount released by the customs authority.
(2.) According to the petitioner, he maintains a Current Account being Current
Account number C.A - 000000066224 with respondent No. 4, the United Bank
of India, Calcutta Branch (CD Customs Department) in which the customs
authority releases the drawback amount payable to the petitioner. There is no
dispute that such an account is opened by an exporter for the purpose of receiving
drawback benefits and such account is called Custom Account. In such an
account except monetary benefits received under drawback scheme, no other
amount can be kept.
(3.) In this writ application, the writ petitioner has alleged that in respect of
9 different transactions mentioned in paragraph 4 of the writ application, goods
exported by the petitioners were duly received and accepted by the overseas
buyers and there was no complaint from the overseas buyers with regard to
those goods or transactions in any manner. It is further alleged that after receipt
of the goods the overseas buyers had also paid the full consideration money to
the petitioners as would appear from annexure 'P-3' to the writ application. It
is further stated that in usual course of business the petitioner regularly
approached the customs authority for release of duty drawback with regard to
those transactions and after being fully satisfied with all documents furnished
by the petitioner, the customs authority from time to time transferred various
sums on different dates in the said bank account. However, the petitioner could
not furnish full particulars. The petitioner's complaint is that on July 10, 2002
he came to learn from bank that the said bank account of the petitioner has
been seized by the customs authority with effect from March 31, 2002 and as
such, the petitioner was not allowed to operate the same. On 7th February,
2003 the petitioner made a representation before the respondent in writing
through a learned Advocate with a request to forthwith withdraw the said illegal
seizure but the respondent had not answered such representation. The petitioner
thus prays for setting aside the order of seizure of the bank account.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.