Customs authorities unlawfully auctioned goods during appeal process, court orders compensation for declared value.

The court found that the customs authorities unlawfully auctioned the petitioner's goods during an ongoing appeal process without proper notice, violating legal procedures and principles of natural justice. The court held the customs authorities responsible for the auction and directed them to compensate the petitioner for the declared value of the goods, amounting to Rs. 51,70,619/-, with 9% annual interest from the date of the unauthorized auction until payment. The writ petition was allowed, and no costs were awarded.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Confiscation and Auction of Imported Goods
2. Restitution of Value of Confiscated Goods
3. Compliance with Legal Procedures and Natural Justice
4. Responsibility and Liability of Customs Authorities and Custodian

Detailed Analysis:

1. Confiscation and Auction of Imported Goods
The petitioner, a company, imported broadcasting equipment declared under Bill of Entry No.7687005 dated 17.08.2012. The customs authorities alleged that the goods required a WPC license and classified them under CTH 85255020, leading to their confiscation on 25.10.2012 and imposition of a penalty of Rs. 5 lakh. Despite a stay order from the CESTAT during the appeal, the goods were auctioned by the custodian, M/s Delhi International Airport (P) Ltd (DIAL), for Rs. 81,000.

2. Restitution of Value of Confiscated Goods
The petitioner succeeded in the appeal before the CESTAT, which set aside the confiscation order. The petitioner then sought the declared value of the goods, Rs. 51,70,619/-, along with interest, as restitution. The court referenced precedents like Northern Plastic Ltd. v. Collector of Customs and Central Excise and Kailash Ribbon Factory Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, which support the restitution of the declared value of goods when confiscation is overturned.

3. Compliance with Legal Procedures and Natural Justice
The petitioner argued that the auction was conducted without proper notice, violating the customs circular F.No.711/4/2006-Cus(AS) dated 14.02.2006, which mandates notice to the owner before auction. The court found that the customs authorities were negligent and failed to comply with the principles of natural justice, as they did not notify the petitioner adequately before the auction.

4. Responsibility and Liability of Customs Authorities and Custodian
The customs authorities claimed that the auction was conducted by the custodian under Section 48 of the Customs Act, 1962, due to the petitioner’s failure to clear the goods. However, the court held that the customs authorities were responsible for the auction and should have ensured compliance with legal procedures. The court directed the customs authorities to pay the declared value of the goods, Rs. 51,70,619/-, after deducting customs duty, with 9% interest per annum from the date of the unauthorized auction until payment.

Conclusion
The court concluded that the customs authorities wrongly disposed of the petitioner’s goods during the appeal period and failed to follow proper legal procedures. The customs authorities were directed to compensate the petitioner for the declared value of the goods along with interest. The writ petition was allowed, and no costs were ordered.

---