GARG SALES CO PVT LTD Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS
LAWS(CAL)-1996-6-21
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on June 25,1996

GARG SALES CO.PVT.LTD. Appellant
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

UNION OF INDIA V. KAMLAKSHI FINANCE CORPORATION LTD. [REFERRED TO]
ACME TRADING CO. V. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Tarun Chatterjee, J. - (1.)By consent of the parties this writ petition is taken up for hearing. Mr. Sarkar learned counsel also points out to me that there is already a direction to this effect in my earlier order. In this writ application the writ petitioner has prayed for a direction upon the Respondent No. 1, Commissioner of Customs to act in accordance with law and to implement the order dated 24-8-1995 passed by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, Eastern [Bench], without any further delay and also for a direction on the respondents to forthwith release the goods being 1.6,000 pieces of 'F.K. Brand' Pillow Block Bearings against provisional assessment and furnishing of P.D. Bond without any further delay. The facts leading to the filing of this application are stated as follows : On or about 7th May, 1994 the petitioner company entered into a contract with . CAP Enterprise Company of Hongkong for the supply of 1,21,000 pieces of 'F.K. Brand' Pillow Block Bearings (hereinafter referred to as the said goods). On or about 2-8-1994 the said goods arrived at the Port of Calcutta, whereupon the petitioner duly filed Bill of Entry for home consumption with all related papers, import documents including sales contract, Invoices and packing list etc.
(2.)Since the goods were not released, the writ petitioner moved an application under Article 32 of the Constitution of India before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India on or about the 19th September, 1994 inter alia, praying for the reliefs as mentioned in the petition.
(3.)Upon the said application being moved before the Apex Court of our country on 3-10-1994 an order was passed to the following effect:
"Shri Ashok Sen, learned senior counsel for the petitioner places before us a copy of the order dated 5-2-1992 made in Writ Petition No. 45 of the 1992 by this Court and prays for making an order in the same terms. The submission of the learned counsel is that this Writ Petition is similar and involves for decision of the same point. In our opinion, an order of the kind shown to us having already been made by this Court in some earlier writ petitions, it is not necessary to entertain any further writ petition directly in this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution as it is open to the petitioner to approach the appropriate High Court for an order of the kind shown to us, in matters which are stated to be similar. Petitioner is permitted to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to file the same in the appropriate High Court."
After the order of the Supreme Court was passed, the writ petitioner received the purported show cause notice which was issued on 20-9-1994 by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, SIB, inter alia, alleging why the value of the goods shall not be determined on the basis of the value as indicated in Column (3) of Paragraph 7(f) of the show cause notice and why the subject goods shall not be confiscated under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962 and penal action shall not be taken against the petitioners under Section 112(a) of the said Act. The writ petitioner has admittedly replied to the said show cause notice. A personal hearing was also given to the writ petitioner.
;


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