TMI Blog2007 (10) TMI 1X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ite Business Machines filed In-bond Bill of Entry under Section 59 of the Customs Act, 1962 and the goods were allowed clearance for warehousing and were deposited in a warehouse on execution of double duty bond. Subsequently, M/s. Nu-lite Business Machines wrote a letter to Customs dated 4-1-05 intimating that they have sold 53.335 MT of Electrolytic Copper Cathodes in three lots to M/s. Shoreline Infrastructure Developers Ltd, and clearance may be allowed to them after payment of all charges including Customs duty and Excise duty. Shoreline Infrastructure Developers Ltd., filed a Bill of Entry for 10.3 MT of Electrolytic Copper Cathodes for clearing the same on payment of duty. While the Bill of Entry was being processed, a letter dated 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Bill of Entry for clearance of 32.54 MT of Electrolytic Copper Cathodes. Since the clearances were not being allowed to M/s Shoreline Infrastructure Developers, in view of the letter received from WBECSC and M/s. Nu-lite Business Machines, M/s Shoreline infrastructure Developers, the present appellant before us, filed a Writ Petition in the Bombay High Court and the High Court directed the Customs authorities to give personal hearing to the petitioners and to pass appropriate reasoned orders, with regard to both the Bills of Entry, within a period of two weeks. 2.Consequent to the Hon'ble High Court's direction, personal hearings were granted to all the three parties i.e. WBECSC, Nu-lite Business Machines and M/s Shoreline Infrastructur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was back dated to circumvent the tripartite agreement entered into on 26-1-05. 5.Mr. M.A. Samad, Director of M/s. Nu-lite confirmed the tripartite agreement dated 26-1-05 and also confirmed the cancellation of high seas sale agreement with retrospective effect. He also confirmed that ownership of the goods remained with M/s. WBECSC as per tripartite agreement dated 26-1-05. It was also stated by him that they had entered into an agreement with M/s Shoreline Infrastructure Developers for sale of the goods and that they have received Rs 14 lakhs from them but since M/s. Shoreline Infrastructure did not comply with the terms of the agreement with M/s. Nu-lite, they do not have the right or claim on the goods. He further stated that an amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... further submitted that they were not party to the tripartite agreement between M/s. WBECSC and M/s. Nu-lite Business Machines and another and therefore the same is not binding on them. Once the agreement has been entered into on 13-8-04, any subsequent agreement will become null and void and therefore the tripartite agreement entered into dated 26-1-05 cannot be given effect to. It was accordingly prayed that the goods should be allowed to be cleared to them. 8.Heard both sides. 9.I find that in this case the goods were originally imported by WBECSC, who had sold the same on high seas sale basis to M/s. Nu-lite Business Machines and it is M/s. Nu-lite Business Machines who have filed the Into Bond Bill of Entry which was accepted by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
