Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2011 (11) TMI 765

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... aid petitioners have filed this writ petition for quashing the seizure of the aforesaid betel nuts which was initially detained on 20.06.2011 by the respondents authorities of the Customs Department and was subsequently seized on the presumption firstly that the consignment was stolen one and secondly that it was of third country origin. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners stated that petitioner no.2 purchased the aforesaid betel nuts through different traders at Jalpaiguri vide proper trade invoices duly registered under Sale Tax Act and Rules, whereafter petitioner no.2 booked the aforesaid consignment of betel nuts with petitioner no.1 at Guwahati for being delivered to one M/s Narayan Trading Company, Naya Bazar, New Delhi after observing all the necessary formalities and preparation of the relevant documents and also after payment of the requisite fees at the Check Posts. It was also stated that on 17.06.2011 the truck was weighed at J.M. Way Bridge which showed the weight of the consignment to be 15,650 Kgs. i.e. within the required limit. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners also argued that in the night between 19th and 20th of June, 2011 the aforesaid truck coll .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... betel nuts in question were of foreign origin. He also stated that there is no prohibition for importing betel nuts from Nepal and the only prohibition is that it should not have been imported to Nepal from any third country. In this regard, he relied upon a decision of the Division Bench of this court in case of Commissioner, Custom Department, Government of India, Patna vs. Dwarika Prasad Agarwal Ors., reported in 2009 (2) P.L.J.R. 858. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioners further argued that in exercise of powers conferred by section 5 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 read with paragraph-2.1 of the foreign Trade Policy 2004-09, the Central Government made amendments in Schedule-I (Imports) of the I.T.C. (HS) Classifications of Export and Import Items vide D.G.F.T. Notification No.15 (RE-2008)/2004-2009 dated 04.06.2008 by which import was permitted freely, provided that the value of the betel nuts, either whole or split or ground or even others, was ₹ 35.00 per kg. and above. In the instant case the value of the betel nuts according to the petitioners was ₹ 45.00 per kg., whereas according the respondents the value of the betel nuts .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t which granted power to the authorities to summon persons to give evidence and produce documents and averred that after the specific admission of the driver and other circumstances reasons to believe existed at the time of seizure of the goods, which were substantiated later on. 12. Finally learned counsel for the respondents stated that under section 110 of the Act, the goods in question can be directed to be released on furnishing securities but the proceeding which has been initiated by the authorities concerned cannot be quashed as it is only a few months old and the petitioners have not even approached the authorities in connection thereof. 13. From the arguments raised on behalf of learned counsel for the parties and the materials on record it is quite apparent that initially the truck in question was detained by the local police officials on a suspicion that it was carrying stolen betel nuts without giving any detention memo or seizure list and when after several days it was found that their suspicion was absolutely baseless the police officials contacted the officers of the Customs Department who directed the driver of the truck to take it to Muzaffarpur Customs Of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... oducts and others vs. Union of India and others, reported in (1994) 4 Supreme Court Cases 269 in which it was held that if a statute requires an authority to exercise power, when such authority is satisfied that conditions exist for exercise of that power, the satisfaction has to be based on the existence of grounds mentioned in the statute. The grounds must be made out on the basis of the relevant material. If the existence of the conditions required for the exercise of the power is challenged, the courts are entitled to examine whether those conditions existed when the order was made. A person aggrieved by such action can question the satisfaction by showing that it was wholly based on irrelevant grounds and hence amounted to no satisfaction at all. In other words, the existence of the circumstances in question is open to judicial review. 18. So far the question regarding reasons to believe is concerned, a Division Bench of this court in case of Angou Golmei (supra) specifically held that the reason for formation of the belief having been spelt out, it is open to the court to consider whether the reasons exist or not and the test would be whether a reasonable, prudent person .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ist is concerned, whenever the goods are seized, the officer seizing the goods must at the time of seizure have a reasonable belief that the goods he was seizing were smuggled goods and any subsequent acquisition of knowledge of such belief would be of no avail. So far the allegation that betel nuts in question were of foreign origin is concerned, a Division Bench of this court in case of Commissioner, Custom Department, Government of India, Patna (supra) had specifically held that it was not in dispute that betel nut was non-notified item and, as such, the onus to prove that the same was of foreign origin lay on Custom authority. 21. In the instant case the Custom authorities did not at all consider the shape and size of the seized betel nuts nor there is any expert trade opinion that the seized betel nuts were in any manner different from the betel nuts available in the country. In the present case neither there is any trade opinion nor any significant decisive difference has been found and hence the seized betel nuts cannot be said with certainty to be of foreign origin. The aforesaid questions have also been considered in detail by another Bench of this court in case of R.G. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates