TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 918X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nitiated against the petitioner were beyond the jurisdiction of the Customs department. In order to secure the interests of the respondents/revenue, the petitioner is directed to furnish a personal bond - Petition disposed off. - W.P.(C) 13828/2021 - - - Dated:- 16-9-2022 - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER AND HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU Petitioner Through: Mr Pradeep Jain, Adv. Respondents Through: Mr Aditya Singla, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr Adhishwar Suri, Adv. [Physical Court hearing/ Hybrid hearing (as per request)] RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (ORAL): 1. The substantive prayer made in the writ petition reads as follows: (i) To issue a writ of mandamus order direction thereby dir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat an adjudication order was passed on 30.04.2010 when the following operative directions were issued qua the petitioner: (a) I confirm the demand of Customs duty amounting to Rs. 2,93,453/- involved on 1982.040 gms of duty free imported gold bars, removed from NSEZ to DTA in a clandestine manner and order to recover the duty along with interest from M/s Meenakshi International under the provisions of Section 28 read with Section 28AB of the Customs Act, 1962 and Rule 34 of the SEZ Rules, 2006; (b) I confirm the demand of Customs Duty amounting to Rs. 3,35,795/- involved on the seized 2294.840 gms of duty free imported gold jewellary [sic: jewellery] removed from NSEZ to DTA in a clandestine manner and order to recover the duty a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 31.01.2011, largely varied the order of adjudication. The operative directions issued by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) are set forth hereafter: 6.2 I find that there is nothing wrong in the imports and exports. Further, I find that the allegations per se are contradictory on facts. It is noted that the Department has accepted the disclosures made by the said persons vide their respective statements duly corroborated by actual imports, exports and exchange of gold bar with jewellery, both in the first instance of exchanging gold bars with jewellery and in the second instance of referred exported jewellery re-imported with new jewellery and that the said jewellery in both the cases was actually exported as is evident from the im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ircumstances prevailing in the instant case and duty involvement of R. 3,35,795/- that Rs. 3,75,000/- only as redemption fine under section 125 of the Act ibid would meet the interest of the justice. [Emphasis is ours.] 5.2. Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed an appeal with the Tribunal. The Tribunal reversed the order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). 5.3. The Tribunal, in the operative part of its order, recorded the following: 7. Considering the observations of Hon ble Gujarat High Court and CESTAT quoted above, we find that customs did not have jurisdiction within Special Economic Zone established under SEZ scheme by the Ministry of Commerce, Government of India and present proceedings initiated by the cust ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
