2012 (9) TMI 31

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r is in the business of Import Trade and Local Trade of plywood sheets, Fiber Boards etc., and has been allotted an IEC for conducting import business by the Joint Director General of Foreign Trade, Zonal Office, Chennai, Ministry of Industry and Commerce, Government of India. 3. The petitioner, in the course of business entered into High Sea Sales Contract with M/s. Geetha Timbers Ply Woods Pvt., Ltd., Theni for purchase of 2320 sheets (40 pallets) of Medium Density Fiber Board. The said M/s. Geetha Timbers Ply Woods Pvt., Ltd. Theni had entered into contract with M/s. Merbok MDF Lanka Pvt., Ltd., Sri Lanka for supply of the goods. It was during the transit of goods, that M/s. Geetha Timbers Ply Woods Pvt., Ltd., Theni entered into an H....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....m and some of its Partners, are Directors in M/s. Geetha Timbers Pvt. Ltd., against whom demand of differential duty on account of their imports of Plain Particle Board from Malaysia is pending for valuation. Fine and penalties were also imposed on M/s. Geetha Timbers. 8. It is not disputed that M/s. Geetha Timbers filed an Appeal against the order along with an application for Stay. Vide order dated 22.05.2009, the learned Tribunal, taking note of the fact that the entire demand of duty had been paid, dispensed with the condition of pre-deposit of the penalty amounts and granted stay of recovery thereof, pending the Appeal. The stay is still in force. 9. The order of the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, in refusing to release the g....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., legally there is no demand, which could give jurisdiction to second respondent to detain the goods imported by the petitioner under the High Sea Sales Contract. The impugned order in refusing to release the goods is also contemptuous, as demand is contrary to the stay granted by the learned Tribunal, and therefore cannot be sustained in law. 15. The stand of the respondents that under Clause 14 of the High Sea Sales Contract, the petitioner had undertaken to clear the liability of M/s. Geetha Timbers is also outcome of mis-interpretation of Clause 14 of the High Sea Sales Contract, as the petitioner under the Contract had undertaken to pay the entire expenses i.e., customs duties, clearing charges, demurrage etc., for the goods purchas....