2017 (1) TMI 339 - HC - Customs

Court directs compliance with customs order, allows gold re-shipment upon payment.

Shri. B. Maheswarar Reddy Power of Attorney of Venugopal Reddy Versus The Principal Commissioner of Customs, Chennai -I (Airport), The Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Airport)

The court directed compliance with the order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) reducing fines and penalties for a petitioner's brother, allowing ... Implementation of order dated 30.11.2015, passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Chennai - jurisdiction of revisional authority - Held that: - the rank of the revisional authority would be upgraded to a level higher than that of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) - The revisional authority, upon ascertaining the veracity of the bank certificate, will allow the petitioner to re-export the subject goods, i.e., gold, upon payment of redemption fine and penalty imposed by the appellate authority, i.e., Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), vide order dated 30.05.2015 - matter on remand. Issues involved:1. Compliance sought with the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) dated 30.11.2015.2. Pending revision petition by the respondents against the order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals).3. Proposed upgrade of the rank of the revisional authority in light of a decision by the Punjab and Haryana High Court.Comprehensive Analysis:Issue 1: Compliance with Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) OrderThe petitioner filed a Writ Petition seeking direction for the respondents to implement the order dated 30.11.2015 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Chennai. The order reduced the redemption fine and penalty imposed on Sri.Venugopal Reddy, allowing him to re-ship gold upon payment of revised amounts. The petitioner, brother and power of attorney of Sri.Venugopal Reddy, sought compliance with this order.Issue 2: Pending Revision PetitionIt was revealed that the respondents had filed a revision petition against the order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). The revision petition was pending adjudication, and no interim order had been granted in favor of the respondents. The counsel for the respondents informed the court that the revisional authority presently held a rank equivalent to the post of Commissioner of Customs (Appeals).Issue 3: Proposed Upgrade of Revisional Authority RankIn light of a judgment by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which ruled that the revisional authority's rank must be higher than that of the appellate authority, the respondents proposed upgrading the rank of the revisional authority to a level higher than the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). The court considered this proposal in the context of the legal requirement highlighted by the Punjab and Haryana High Court decision.The court disposed of the Writ Petition with directions for compliance, including the requirement for a bank certificate, ensuring availability of funds for redemption fine and penalty. The revisional authority was instructed to decide the pending petition promptly, not later than eight weeks from the date of the court's order. The judgment concluded by closing the connected miscellaneous petition without any order as to costs.