High Court quashes confiscation order due to lack of hearing, directs release of steel coils

NARESH CHAND VERMA Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

NARESH CHAND VERMA Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER - 1986 (26) E.L.T. 205 (Kar.) Issues:
1. Quashing of order passed by Assistant Collector of Customs
2. Release of 10 GP defective steel coils
3. Violation of natural justice in confiscation order

Analysis:

Issue 1: Quashing of order passed by Assistant Collector of Customs
The petitioner imported 113 GP defective steel coils, with 10 coils unloaded at Mangalore Port and the rest at Cochin Port due to a labor strike. The Assistant Collector of Customs issued a show cause notice for failure to clear the goods. The petitioner sought time for hearing but failed to appear on the scheduled date. The High Court held that the order of confiscation lacked natural justice as the petitioner was not given an opportunity for a personal hearing. The Court noted that the petitioner had obtained an order for the release of the remaining 103 coils in a separate case, indicating his willingness to comply with legal requirements. Therefore, the Court quashed the order of confiscation based on the violation of natural justice.

Issue 2: Release of 10 GP defective steel coils
The fate of the 10 GP defective steel coils was linked to the 103 coils released at Cochin Port. The Collector of Customs in Cochin had issued an order confiscating the goods but allowed redemption on payment of fines and penalties. The petitioner had filed a case in the High Court of Kerala for the release of the 103 coils and agreed to pay the imposed penalties and duties. Given that the petitioner was willing to comply with the conditions set for the release of the 103 coils, the Court directed the Assistant Collector of Customs in Mangalore to release the 10 coils subject to similar conditions, including payment of duties, bank guarantees, and security deposits.

Issue 3: Violation of natural justice in confiscation order
The Court emphasized the importance of affording the petitioner a fair hearing before confiscating the goods. It noted that the petitioner's claim of not receiving the communication for the scheduled hearing was plausible since no evidence was presented by the respondents to prove otherwise. The Court highlighted that the petitioner's proactive legal actions in the case of the remaining coils demonstrated his willingness to comply with legal procedures. Therefore, the Court concluded that the confiscation order was passed in violation of natural justice and directed the release of the 10 GP defective steel coils upon fulfillment of specified conditions.