Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. MANIKUMAR, V. BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, JJ.
M/s. The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd., New Delhi – Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner of Customs, Chennai & Another – Respondents
W.A. No. 504 of 2018 & CMP. No. 4732 of 2018
Decided On : 19-03-2018
Customs Act - Misuse of Tariff Rate Quota Scheme - Section 28(2), 28(8), 28AB, 28AA, 111(d), 111(o), 114A, 112, 129 A(1)
Fact of the Case:
The writ appeal was filed against the order declining to entertain the writ petition and granting liberty to file statutory appeal under Section 129 A(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. The case involved the misuse of Tariff Rate Quota Scheme in the import of popcorn maize by M/s. Haji Sattar & Sons, leading to duty exemption benefit rejection, confiscation of goods, and imposition of penalties.
Finding of the Court:
The court declined to entertain the writ petition due to the availability of an alternative remedy under Section 129 A(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. It emphasized the principle that writ petitions should not be entertained when effective alternative remedies exist, especially in revenue matters.
Issues: The main issue was the availability of an alternative remedy under Section 129 A(1) of the Customs Act, 1962, and whether the writ petition should be entertained in the presence of disputed questions of fact.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on various legal principles and precedents to emphasize the importance of exhausting statutory remedies before resorting to writ jurisdiction, especially in revenue matters. It highlighted that the existence of an alternative remedy is a rule of policy, convenience, and discretion, and not a rule of law.
Final Decision: The writ appeal was dismissed, and no costs were imposed. The court upheld the decision to decline the writ petition and permit the appellant to file an appeal before CESTAT, Madras, under Section 129 A(1) of the Customs Act, 1962.
S. Manikumar, J.
1. Mr.Santhanaraman, learned Central Government Senior Standing Counsel takes notice for the Commissioner of Customs, Office of the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai, the 1st respondent herein, takes notice.
2. Writ Appeal is directed against the order made in W.P.No.19308 of 2017 dated 30.10.2017, by which, the writ Court, while declining to entertain the writ petition, against the order-in-Original No.54955 of 2017 dated 17.04.2017, granted liberty to the appellant to file statutory appeal under Section 129 A(1) of the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962.
3. Brief facts leading to the writ appeal are that pursuant to a show cause notice dated 04.10.2013 issued by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, on the subject "Misuse of Tariff Rate Quota Scheme in the import of popcorn maize by M/s. Haji Sattar & Sons, Chennai", the adjudicating authority, vide order dated 17.04.2017, held as follows:
"1. Imports made through Nhava-Sheva Port, Maharashtra,
(i) I reject the duty exemption benefit of Sr.No.21 of the Notification No.21/2002-Customs dated 01.03.2002 claimed and extended at the time of assessment of said 05 consignments and order for recovery of Customs duty @ 50% along with applicable Education Cess and I confirm the total duty amounting to Rs.2,73,97, 613/- (Rupees Two Crores Seventy three lakhs ninety seven thousand six hundred and thirteen only) under Section 28(2) and 28(8) of the Customs Act, 1962 along with interest under Section 28AB/28AA of the Customs Act, 1962, as applicable during the period of their of currency, jointly and severally on M/s. Haji Sattar & Sons, Chennai and M/s. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd., New Delhi.
(ii) I hold that 2415 MT of popcorn maize valued at Rs.5,31,99,247/- imported vide aforesaid 14 Bills of Entry are liable to confiscation under Section 111 (d) and 111 (o) of the Customs Act, 1962. Since the goods are not physically available for confiscation, I refrain from imposing any fine.
(iii) I impose a penalty of Rs.2,73,97,613/- and interest thereon (Rupees Two Crores Seventy Three Lakhs Ninety Seven Thousand Six Hundred and thirteen only and the interest thereon) under Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962, jointly and severally on M/s. Haji Sattar & Sons and M/s. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd.
(iv) I order for appropriation of Rs.21,36,594/- deposited with M/s. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd., during course of investigation towards the dues recoverable.
(v) I impose a penalty of Rs.40,00,000/- (Rupees Forty Lakhs only) on Shri Siraj Ashraf, Partner of M/s. Haji Sattar & Sons under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962.
(vi) I impose a penalty of Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs only) on Shri Imtiyaz Hussein, Partner of M/s. Haji Sattar Habib & Sons under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962.
II. Imports made through Seaport-Import, Chennai.
(i). I reject the duty exemption benefit of Sr.No.21 of the Notification No.21/2002-Customs dated 01.03.2002 claimed and extended at the time of assessment of aforesaid 09 consignments and order for recovery of Customs duty @ 50% along with applicable Education Cess and I confirm the total duty amounting to Rs.1,42,07,363/- (Rupees One Crore Forty Two Lakhs Seven Thousand Three Hundred Sixty Three only) under Section 28(2) and 28(8) of the Customs Act, 1962, along with interest under Section 28AB/28AA of the Customs Act, 1962, as applicable during the period of their currency, jointly and severally on M/s. Haji Sattar & Sons, Chennai and M/s. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd, New Delhi.
(ii). I hold that 1150 MT of popcorn maize value at Rs.2,75,87,112/- imported vide aforesaid 09 Bills of Entry be liable to confiscation under Section 111 (d) and 111(o) of the Customs Act, 1962; Since the goods are not physically available for confiscation, I refrain from imposing any fine.
(iii). I impose a penalty of Rs.1,42,07,363/- and interest thereon (Rupees One Crore Forty Two Lakhs Seven Thousand Three Hundre
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
