- (1.) CM. No. 145 of 2008 CM. is allowed and the documents Annexures P-3 to P-5 are taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. CM. No. 258 of 2008 C.M. is allowed and the copy of the letter dated 8-1-2008 (Annexure P6) is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. CM. No. 206 of 2008 and CWP No. 18601 of 2007 After notice of motion, on 20-12-2007, the following interim order was passed by this Court :- "In pursuance of our order dated 18-12-2007, Mr. Kamal Sehgal learned counsel for the respondents has placed on record a copy of the letter dated 19-12-2007 showing that a fact finding Committee headed by an Officer in the grade of Deputy/Assistant Commissioner has been constituted which is to submit its report and appropriate action is to be taken against the erring Officer. However, we are not satisfied that a Committee could be headed by Deputy/Assistant Commissioner to probe a scam of such a magnitude as is claimed by the respondents. We are of the view that an Officer not below the rank of Commissioner is required to be appointed. The respondents shall consider the aforementioned possibility of appointing an Officer of the rank of Commissioner. Let status report be submitted on or before 8-1-2008 with a copy in advance to the learned counsel for the petitioners. Mr. Jagmohan Bansal, learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on interim orders passed in CWP Nos. 9553, 9554 and 9918 of 2006 on 11-7-2006. It is claimed that there is graver necessity to issue interim directions in the present case as the goods are perishable in nature. Accordingly, during the pendency of the petition, the following directions are issued : (i) The goods which are lying seized in the premises of the petitioners, and have already been subjected to the payment of duty at the time of import shall be released to the petitioners on their furnishing bank guarantee to the extent of duty leviable on the goods by assessing the value thereof @ US $ 3 per kg. However, the amount of duties already paid to the petitioners on these goods shall be reduced. (ii As far as the goods lying at the port are concerned, the same shall be released to the petitioners on payment of duty on the value of the goods, as declared by the petitioners and complying with other formalities for release of goods. The petitioners will be further required to furnish bank guarantee of difference of duty in case the value of the goods is assessed @ US $ 3 per kg. (ii Seizure of the bank account of the petitioners shall be released forthwith. The above arrangement is by way of interim measure. However, the petitioners shall abide by final order determining their liability in appropriate proceedings under the Act (subject to their statutory remedy). The petitioners shall cooperate with the respondent-department. List again on 10-1-2008. A copy of the order be given dasti under the signatures of Bench Secretary."
(2.) After passing of the aforesaid order, Mr. Dheeraj Rastogi, Joint Director, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Ludhiana Regional Unit, Ludhiana, wrote a letter to the Additional Commissioner, Container Freight Station (CFS), Focal Point, Ludhiana, for provisional release of the seized goods with reference to the aforesaid interim order passed by this court in case of the petitioners. In the said letter, it has been written that the seized goods of the petitioners are to be released on fulfillment of the following conditions :- "(i The goods which are lying seized in the premises of the petitioners and have already been subjected to the payment of duty at the time of import shall be released to the petitioners on their furnishing bank guarantee to the extent of duty leviable on the goods by assessing the value thereof @ US $ 3 per kg. However, the amount of duties already paid to the petitioners on these goods shall be reduced. (ii As far as the goods lying at the port are concerned, the same shall be released to the petitioners on payment of duty on the value of the goods, as declared by the petitioners and complying with other formalities for release of goods. The petitioners will be further required to furnish bank guarantee of difference of duty in case the value of the goods is assessed @ US $ 3 per kg. (ii The party shall also execute an Indemnity Bond for full market value of the seized goods. (iv The party shall give a written undertaking that they shall not dispute the value/indemnity of the goods during the adjudication and other proceedings under the Customs Act."
(3.) Counsel for the petitioners pointed out that conditions No. (iii) and (iv) were not imposed by this Court while passing the aforementioned interim order, but the said officer has modified/altered the said order by adding these two conditions. Therefore, learned counsel contends that the officer has committed the contempt of court.;