TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (2) TMI 537
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tition. 2. The petitioner is a Private Limited Company represented by its Regional Manager. The petitioner had obtained licence for transporting Imported Cargo from one Airport to another as per the terms of Ext. P1 agreement entered into with the President of India. As per the terms of Ext. P1 agreement, the petitioner is entrusted with the work of transporting Imported Cargo in containers/trucks between one Airport to another Airport. Ext. P2 Circular issued by the Government of India prescribes the formalities for the movement of such Imported Cargo. The goods are moved under the 'Bonded Trucking Facility' from the Airports. As per Ext. P2, such movement is to be governed by Chapter VIII of the Customs Act, 1962 and the Goods Imp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ording to the petitioner, the transport was authorised by proper documents, Exts. P4, P5, P6 and P7. The consignment was transported in a Customs Bonded Truck bearing registration No. TN-05-AM 2547 under Transshipment Permit No. 317/12 & 318/12, dated 19-4-2012. The consignments were valued at Rs. 10,94,000/- in the name of Jet Airways (India) Limited, Thiruvananthapuram. All the other necessary formalities for such transport as per the Customs Act, 1962 also had been complied with and the consignment was transported accompanied by all necessary documents. 4. On 21-4-2012, the truck of the petitioner was intercepted at the Amaravila Check Post and was detained by the State Excise Officials. Though all the documents were produced bef....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nded Trucks facility, with the entire consignment supported by proper documents issued by the Customs officials. The goods were transported in accordance with the provisions of Sec. 67 of the Customs Act, 1962. Such movement of liquor, according to the counsel, is not subject to the provisions of the Abkari Act or Rules made thereunder. No transit permit as required by the State Abkari Act or the Rules is necessary for movement of liquor under the Bonded Truck facility. The counsel therefore seeks the issue of appropriate orders quashing the entire proceedings and awarding costs. 8. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 4 and 5 supporting the contentions of the petitioner. According to the counter-affidavit als....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o have obtained a permit under the Kerala Liquor Transit Rules, 1975 before transporting the goods. Since the Foreign Made Foreign Liquor was transported without a transport permit, an offence under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act was made out. 12. Section 57 of the Customs Act, 1962 ('Customs Act' for short) permits the Assistant Commissioner of Customs or Deputy Commissioner of Customs to appoint public warehouses wherein dutiable goods may be deposited. As per Sec. 58 of the Customs Act, the Assistant Commissioner of Customs or the Deputy Commissioner of Customs is empowered to licence private warehouses wherein dutiable goods imported by or on behalf of the licensee may be deposited. The deposit contemplated by Sec. 58 is subjec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....p;Rule 3 of the Liquor Transit Rules, 1975 relied on by respondents 2 and 6, reads as follows : "3. Permit of transit of liquor. - No liquor shall be allowed to be moved from one place in a State to another place in that State or to any other State through the territory of the State of Kerala except under a permit issued by the Assistant Excise Commissioner of the Division through whose jurisdiction it is proposed to be moved : Provided that when liquor has to be moved through more than one Excise Division, the permit shall be issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Excise and when liquor has to be moved through more than one Excise Zone by the Excise Commissioner." A perusal of the above provision shows that the same is applicab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Customs Act as well as the Goods Imported (Conditions of Transshipment) Regulations, 1995. The State Excise authorities therefore had no authority whatsoever to seize the said consignment and to register a case as done in the present case by Exts. P12 and P14. 15. I am supported in the above view by the decision in Assistant Commissioner of Customs v. State of Kerala and others [2010 (4) KHC 793 = 2011 (265) E.L.T. 185 (Ker.)], where a Single Bench of this Court had occasion to deal with a similar situation. M. Sasidharan Nambiar J, has concluded the issue in the following words in paragraph 6 of the said judgment, which reads thus : "The foreign made foreign liquor seized in this case were all imported to India. Annexure 1 to 1....