COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS Vs. PANKAJ V SHETH
LAWS(CAL)-1996-12-12
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on December 20,1996

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS Appellant
VERSUS
PANKAJ V.SHETH Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS,KANDLA V. DIMPLE OVERSEAS LTD. [REFERRED TO]
SHILPI EXPORTS AND ANR. V. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS [REFERRED TO]
GUDUTHUR BROS VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER SPECIAL CIRCLE BANGALORE [REFERRED TO]
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX LAW BOARD OF REVENUE TAXES ERNAKULAM VS. C T VARGHESE [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

Kanhaiya Exports VS. Commissioner of Customs [LAWS(CAL)-2001-5-13] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. SUKHA RANJAN CHATTERJEE [LAWS(CAL)-2004-4-1] [REFERRED TO]
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ARTICAL 226 VS. DEPUTY ENTITLEMENT [LAWS(CAL)-2010-2-87] [REFERRED TO]
J.G. EXPORTS VS. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS [LAWS(CE)-2000-9-238] [REFERRED TO]
CC, ICD, TKD VS. KADMABRI WORLDWIDE AND ORS. [LAWS(CE)-2015-1-57] [REFERRED TO]
OM PRAKASH BHATIA VS. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS [LAWS(CE)-2000-12-196] [REFERRED TO]
DINDAYAL GUPTA VS. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [LAWS(CAL)-2010-2-175] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Ruma Pal, J. - (1.)The basic issue involved in this appeal is whether the customs authorities have the right to refuse to endorse the exports made by an Exporter in the DEEC Book of export Part II after the export is effected by the Exporter.
(2.)The writ petitioner had exported plastic Flat Jet Nozzles made from HDPE Granules on 7th January, 1994 to a purchaser at Singapore. The FOB value of the Nozzles was declared as Rs. 48,46,850/-. The goods were examined by the Appraising Department of the Customs. Samples were drawn by them to verify the value of the Nozzles. The goods were suspected of being over invoiced. Pending enquiry the export was allowed provisionally against a bond. Assessment was made provisionally and an endorsement was made on the Shipping bill to this effect by the Customs Authorities. The Customs Authorities however refused to endorse the fact of export in Part II of the DEEC book of the writ petitioner. Unless the Customs Authorities make such endorsement the writ petitioner cannot apply for transfer of the import licence for import of duty free goods to which the writ petitioner became entitled by reason of such export. It is the petitioner's case that the customs authorities were duty bound to make the endorsement of the export and they had no jurisdiction to question the valuation of the goods.
(3.)In this background of facts the writ application was moved by the writ petitioner on 24th March, 1995 inter alia for a direction on the customs authorities to record and certify the exports effected by the petitioner in the DEEC book of export Part II and to return the same to the petitioner. Interim relief was also prayed for in the same terms. By an order dated 24th March, 1995 the learned Single Judge directed the Customs Authorities to make the endorsement as prayed for by the writ petitioner and to return the DEEC Book after such endorsement to the petitioner within 12 days. Within the same period the respondents were also directed to extend the validity period of the writ petitioner's licence by a period of six months. The learned Judge was of the view that if the goods were not worthless the valuation of the petitioner must be accepted for the time being especially because the entire foreign exchange had already been received in India. It was also noted that the validity period of the writ petitioner's licence expired on 13th February, 1995; that the export had been completed long before and the foreign buyers had made their remittance long before and that the period of licence had been allowed to expire without serving a show cause notice and also without making of any endorsement. It was recorded in the order that a show cause notice dated 20th February, 1995 had been served on the petitioner. The parties were given the liberty to proceed with the same. It was clarified that the order passed on the writ application would be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties. The writ application is still pending.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.