9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 675X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted, had filed application dated 24th July, 2007 for settlement of disputes arising from show cause notice No. DRI-23/61/2006-DZU/1411, dated 23rd March, 2007 issued by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Delhi Zonal Unit. 3. The operative portion of the impugned rejection order passed by the Settlement Commission reads as under :- "7. The Bench has considered the records of the case, written explanation of the applicant sent in response to the Notice and the contentions made during the hearing. The Bench observes that as per First Proviso to Section 127 of the Act, deposit of the entire additional amount of Customs duty accepted by the applicant, along with interest due thereon is a condition precedent for making an applic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctor of the afore stated company, relates to Customs duty demand of Rs. 1,41,372/- and Rs. 11,43,617/- plus interest and confiscation of the seized goods in addition to Customs duty demand of Rs. 3,80,007/-. Aforesaid show cause notice arises from investigation and search and seizure operations at the bonded warehouse of M/s. Continental Sales Emporium (Private) Limited. M/s. Continental Sales Emporium (Private) Limited, it is alleged, had illicitly diverted duty free foreign liquor meant for consumption of diplomats, etc. to third persons. During the search of the residential premises of the petitioner, imported foreign liquor of value of Rs. 2,94,000/- involving Customs duty of Rs. 1,41,372/- was seized. Imported liquor as rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /-. Failure to deposit interest of Rs. 18,635/-, it is apparent, was based upon legal advice and understanding of the experts consulted by the petitioner. Moreover, we find that the High Court while issuing notice on the writ petition vide order dated 13th November, 2007 had directed the petitioner to deposit Rs. 19,000/- with the Registrar General of this Court. The said deposit was made on 20th November, 2007. The writ petition has remained pending since then and was admitted to hearing vide order dated 4th August, 2009. 8. Counsel for the respondents, during the course of hearing, has accepted that adjudication proceedings are still pending and order-in-original has not been passed for last nearly nine years. 9. We would also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riod of one month from the date of communication. 12. The writ petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. The impugned order dated 10th August, 2007 would be treated as quashed and set aside, subject of course to the petitioner making payment of Rs. 50,000/- to the Prime Minister's Relief Fund and the petitioner making payment of the balance amount of interest payable on Rs. 18,635/-. In case the petitioner does not make the aforesaid payments, it will be open to the Settlement Commission to pass a rejection order. We clarify that this Court has not made any comments on merits. We further clarify that the Settlement Commission would be entitled to examine all aspects, including question of full and true disclosure, etc. 13. To ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
