TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (11) TMI 489
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ected to issue amendment to Licence in accordance with or as per the draft annexed alongwith letter of the petitioner dated 3rd January, 2007 with or without modification, or amendment, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper'. (d) Costs of this Contempt Petition be awarded in favour of the Petitioner. (e) For such further and other reliefs as the nature and circumstances of the case may require." 2. The petition proceeds on the following basis : (i) That Writ Petition No.1174 of 2003 was filed by the Petitioner challenging the impugned order dated 21st February, 2003 passed by the 2nd and 3rd Respondent rejecting the 2nd Appeal of the petitioner. The Division Bench of this Hon'ble High Court by its order dated 7th April, 2006, disposed off the petition. The operative part, of the said order is as follows : "3.5 In these circumstances without going into other arguments advanced by the petitioner in the interest of justice we pass the following order :- (a) In the light of the impugned order passed in the 2nd Appeal on 21st- February, 2003, the licensing authorities shall not enforce the Bond/Bank Guarantee executed by the petiti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... find the relevant policy provisions, which extended concessional duty benefits for supplies made to the Rashtriya Chemicals and Fertilisers Limited (for short "RCF"), a project financed by the Govt. of India. Contemnor further stated in his letter that their office has still not received a certified copy of the said order dated 7th April, 2006 and requesting the petitioner to supply copy of relevant policy provisions and corresponding Custom Notification, which extended concessional duty benefits to the RCF, a project financed by the Govt. of India within 10 days so that necessary orders can be issued. 5.5 Petitioner's letter dated 4th May, 2006, in reply to the contemnor's Letter dated 1st May, 2006, informing its inability to give the correct provisions in their policy as required by them and requesting them to consult their Senior Counsel, who had appeared for them in the High Court. Also informed that this order from RCF was under global tendering procedure and requested them to take action in terms of the Hon'ble High Court order-dated 7th April, 2006. 5.6 Petitioner's letter dated 5th May 2006 to contemnor enclosing the letter dated 28th April 2006 with....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ansion of a project would be endorsed, as admissible on the recommendations of the sponsoring authority concerned for availing concessional rate of duty. Before making recommendations, the sponsoring authority, will satisfy itself that the case is covered under the relevant notification issued by the Ministry of Finance in this regard. The endorsement, to be on the basis of licence will be as follows :- "Project import for assessment under Heading No. 84.66 of Section XVI of the Customs Tariff Act 1975 (51 of 1975)". (2) It may be noted that the proper authority to decide whether a particular import is eligible to the concessional rate of duty as project import is the custom authority. Such authority may allow the benefit of concessional duty, whether permissible even without the endorsement of the licensing authority to this effect on the relevant import licence, on the basis of the recommendation of the sponsoring authority. (3) Where import of machineries allowed under OGL, the benefit of concessional rate of duty may be all owed by the Custom officer on the recommendation of the sponsoring authority concerned. However, the record is not readily traceable i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that respondents have willfully committed breach of the order of the Division Bench. Hence, admit. 2. Issue show cause notice to the respondents to show cause as to why they should not be tried and punished for having committed civil contempt of this Court. A copy of the petition and the copy of this order to accompany with the show cause notice. The show cause notice is made returnable after four weeks from the date of its issuance. Place the petition on Board on the date on which the show cause notice is made returnable." 7. After the Show Cause Notice was served, an affidavit has been filed by the Joint Director of Foreign Trade, Mumbai. It is contended that the order has been fully abided by and complied with. The licence has been amended. In paragraph 4, 5 and 6 of the affidavit in reply, this is what is stated :- "4. I repeat, reiterate and confirm that inobedience of the Hon'ble High Court's Order dated 7th April, 2006, my office in exercise of powers conferred under Rule 8 of the Foreign Trade (Regulation) Act, 1993 amended the Special Imprest Licence No. P/K/2993896 dated 30th May, 1983 into Project Import Licence, which entitles petitioner to make....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....olicy provisions and requested to this office to consult the Senior Counsel, who had appeared in the High Court. The respondent office again requested vide letter dated 11th May, 2006 to forward a copy of relevant policy provision. 8. Insofar as compliance being beyond time, this is what is stated in paragraphs 7 and 9 of the affidavit in reply filed by the Joint Director Foreign Trade, Mumbai :- "7. In the meantime, the respondent office approached the Law Ministry at Mumbai requesting for opinion for filing S.L.P. before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the order dated 7-4-2006. After receiving opinion from the Law Ministry, the respondent office amended the category of Special Imp rest Licence No. P/K/2993896 dated 30th May, 1983 into Project Import Licence vide Letter dated 20th October, 2006 but Unfortunately and inadvertently respondent office could not dispatch in time. The petitioner firm vide letter dated 3rd January, 2007 reminded for Issuance of the amendment letter. Alongwith the said Letter petitioner firm furnished a draft Letter for amendment to be issued, which is annexed as Exhibit-J to the petition. On receipt of the above reminder letter, r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tter dated 3-1-2007 from us, they took 23 days to dispatch it. Our reminder letter dated is 3-1-2007 and not 1-1-2007 as mentioned by them. The statements like unconditional and sincere apology has just no meaning in these circumstances. 30. In the context of all that is stated hereinabove, I state that the contemnor was required to obey the order within six weeks, i.e. on or before 19-5-2006, whereas the very first letter he has written to the Law Ministry seeking their opinion was on 23-6-2006 after the period was over. I have already stated in the earlier paragraphs that the delay caused for seeking the legal opinion cannot be considered. I state that the contemnor was on leave, very much after committing the contempt and therefore, he was on a Long leave can also be considered as the reason for condoning the delay. The contemnor has not even stated the number of days for which he is seeking delay. At the outset, I state that there is no provision in Law for condoning the delay and all that could have been done by the Contemnor was to apply for the extension of the period within six weeks by giving the reason. But since on 20-5-2006 once the contempt is committed it is a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pline. But the Head of the Department/designated officer is ultimately responsible and accountable to the Court for the result of the action done or decision taken. Despite this, if there is any special circumstance absolving him of the accountability or if someone else is responsible for the action, he needs to bring them to the notice of the Court so that appropriate procedure is adopted and action taken. The controlling officer holds each of them responsible at the pain of disciplinary action. The object thereby is to ensure compliance of the rule of law. 4. The constitutional Courts exercise their power of judicial review with constraint to ensure that the authorities on whom the power is entrusted under the rule of law or confided, is discharged truly, objectively, expeditiously for the purpose for which substantive acts/results are intended. The petitioner being a member of the permanent executive is enjoined to comply with the orders of the Court passed in exercise of the judicial review. On an earlier occasion, while disposing of the writ petition, the High Court had directed the respondent to consider the case of the writ petitioner and to dispose it of with reason....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ance with law. For discharging that duty, the Court has got to adopt an attitude of critical assessment of situations connected with litigation brought before it for adjudication. The manner of functioning of the Court in accord with the Rule of law has to be dispassionate, objective and analytical. The Judges who preside over these courts do not act with a sense of superiority; nor do they look down upon others in the community. In order that the system may efficiently work and the purpose for which the courts are established is duly served, it is necessary that everyone within the framework of the Rule of Law must accept the system, render due obedience to orders made and in the event of failure of compliance, the rod of justice must, descend down to punish. We hope and trust that everyone within the system realizes this situation and does not unnecessary get into a confrontation." 14. In the instant case also, delay has occurred in compliance with the Court's directions. 15. Although, I am accepting the unconditional apology, tendered by the respondents, despite strong reservations expressed by the petitioner, I wish to remind all concerned that, irrespecti....