CESTAT sets aside order, Customs fails to comply, Tribunal notes judicial indiscipline

The CESTAT set aside the adjudication order, granting relief to the appellants regarding the failure to issue Export Promotion Copies for specific Shipping Bills related to the export of viscos shawls to Dubai. Despite the CESTAT order, Customs authorities failed to comply, leading to a Tribunal's observation of judicial indiscipline. The Tribunal, lacking authority to enforce judgments, advised the appellants to seek appropriate forums to compel public authorities to adhere to judicial discipline.

---

---

Issues:
1. Failure to issue Export Promotion Copies for specific Shipping Bills.
2. Enforcement of CESTAT order for consequential relief.

Issue 1: Failure to issue Export Promotion Copies for specific Shipping Bills
The appellants filed a Miscellaneous Application seeking orders directing the respondents to issue Export Promotion Copies for certain Shipping Bills related to the export of viscos shawls to Dubai. The export value and DEPB claim were declared by the appellants, and subsequent market inquiries by Revenue confirmed the declared value. However, after delays and a Show Cause Notice, the adjudicating authority determined a different value, imposed penalties, and held the goods liable for confiscation. The appellants appealed to CESTAT, which found no merit in the adjudication order, set it aside, and granted relief to the appellants.

Issue 2: Enforcement of CESTAT order for consequential relief
The appellants, post the CESTAT order, approached Customs authorities multiple times for the issuance of Export Promotion Copies, but received no response. They filed a Miscellaneous Application seeking enforcement of the CESTAT order for consequential relief. The Departmental Representative had no defense except for seeking a report from Customs, which was not received. The Tribunal noted the Customs authorities' disregard for the CESTAT order, highlighting it as a gross judicial indiscipline that undermines the rule of law and causes undue harassment to the appellants. However, the Tribunal clarified its lack of legal authority to enforce judgments and suggested the appellants approach appropriate forums empowered to compel public authorities to observe judicial discipline and face consequences for such conduct.

---