2001 (4) TMI 531 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Non-compliance with Tribunal directions by the department.
2. Delay in making a statement by the department.
3. Reference to Enforcement Directorate regarding seizure of currency.
4. Commissioner's failure to obey Tribunal's findings promptly.
5. Commissioner's submission on another investigative agency's involvement.
6. Tribunal's inability to issue further instructions due to the circumstances.

Issue 1: Non-compliance with Tribunal directions by the department
The judgment addressed a grievance regarding the department's failure to comply with the Tribunal's directions. Orders were issued to the departmental representative to seek instructions from the Commissioner. Subsequently, a time-frame was set for the Commissioner to determine the liability of Indian and foreign currencies under FERA. The Commissioner's delay in adhering to the Tribunal's orders was noted, leading to dissatisfaction expressed by the Tribunal.

Issue 2: Delay in making a statement by the department
The Commissioner's letter highlighted the department's failure to make a statement as directed by the Tribunal within the specified timeframe. The letter mentioned the department's actions regarding the refund of a penalty and the involvement of the Enforcement Directorate in a currency seizure case. The Tribunal acknowledged the delay in the Commissionerate's compliance with its orders and expressed disappointment in the delay.

Issue 3: Reference to Enforcement Directorate regarding seizure of currency
The Commissioner's letter referred to the Enforcement Directorate's involvement in a currency seizure case, indicating the intention to hand over the seized currency to the Directorate. However, the applicant's counsel claimed to have received no notice from the Enforcement Directorate regarding the seizure, raising concerns about the communication and procedural aspects of the case.

Issue 4: Commissioner's failure to obey Tribunal's findings promptly
The judgment criticized the Commissioner for not promptly obeying the Tribunal's findings, noting that the reference to the Enforcement Directorate occurred before receiving the order for compliance. Despite the Commissioner's submission about another investigative agency's involvement, the Tribunal emphasized the importance of promptly implementing its orders in appeal disposal, even without subsequent directions for compliance.

Issue 5: Commissioner's submission on another investigative agency's involvement
The Commissioner mentioned another investigative agency's involvement in the matter, indicating that the agency was handling the case. This submission was considered by the Tribunal in assessing the situation and determining the course of action. The Commissioner's reference to the other agency's role influenced the Tribunal's decision-making process regarding issuing further instructions or orders.

Issue 6: Tribunal's inability to issue further instructions due to the circumstances
Given the circumstances, including the Commissioner's reference to another investigative agency and the actions taken regarding the currency seizure, the Tribunal concluded that no further instructions or orders could be issued at that juncture. The Tribunal highlighted the applicant's freedom to pursue alternative legal avenues in light of the existing situation and the involvement of other agencies in the case.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues addressed by the Tribunal, including non-compliance with directions, delays in making statements, involvement of the Enforcement Directorate, the Commissioner's failure to promptly obey findings, the impact of another investigative agency's role, and the Tribunal's decision-making constraints based on the circumstances presented in the case.