TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 1044X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed creditor to lay claim over immovable property –There was no indication in Customs Act that property of defaulter which was put to auction can still be claimed by Customs Department after title passes to auction purchaser once it was held that it has no primacy for its dues – Therefore there was no merit in proceedings – Decided against Appellant. - W.P. (C) No. 4412 of 2014 and C.M. No. 8829 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 15-1-2015 - S. Ravindra Bhat and R.K. Gauba, JJ. Shri Satish Aggarwal, Advocate, for the Petitioner. Shri Ravi Kant Chadha, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Mansi Chadha, Prashanto Chandra Sen and Ms. Anushruti, Advocates, for the Respondent. ORDER The present petition preferred by the Union of India (UOI) through the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as well as the proceeds of the sale. The order dated 21-9-2010, ruled inter alia that the Customs Department could not be considered a secured creditor so far as the claim of primacy over and above the rights of the decree holders is concerned. 3. The Customs Department was not aggrieved by this order. The auction purchaser, however, impugned a portion of the said order, particularly the direction in para 42(iv), granting liberty to Customs Department to recover its amount in accordance with law under the Customs Act. The auction purchaser also challenged the order of the DRT which upset the finding of the RO that the auction purchaser was not under contractual obligation to pay Customs duty, and granted consequential liberty to the form ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Customs Act has created first charge-over any property on account of the order of attachment. It is, therefore, not possible to sustain that part of the judgment whereby liability has been fastened on to the appellant to pay the Customs dues. 4. Learned counsel for the Customs Department urges that even though the findings concerning inability of the Revenue to recover dues on account of its not being secured creditor having become final, nevertheless, the impugned order is erroneous. He argued firstly that the auction notice dated 20-8-2007 pursuant to which the third respondent had purchased the property, clearly revealed the extent of dues payable to the Customs Department which were in excess of ₹ 2 crores and that such dues ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry of recovers or claim was not available when the auction was conducted in the present case. 6. It was also argued that the Customs authorities have not relied upon any substantive provision to base their contention that despite transfer of property they would yet have overriding charge over the subject of such auction. Having failed in their primary claim to be secured creditor, they cannot now achieve indirectly what the law does not permit them to do directly. 7. It is evident from the above discussion that the Customs Department is not aggrieved by the ruling of the DRAT that it could not be treated as secured creditor to lay claim over immovable property. That to our mind seals its fate on the substantial arguments sought to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le to duties of customs including anti-dumping, countervailing and safeguard duties under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975), where applicable, as leviable on such goods when imported; and (c) the rate of duty and tariff valuation, if any, applicable to goods admitted to, or removed from, a special economic zone shall be the rate and tariff valuation in force as on the date of such admission or removal, as the case may be, and where such date is not ascertainable, on the date of payment of the duty. 9. In Karamchand Appliance (supra), it is noticed that besides relying upon company winding up proceedings, that Division Bench did not deal with the instance of a statutory authority or a claim for overriding primacy of the Re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
