AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (4) TMI 894
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ide Letter dated 16.06.2017, has accepted the apportionment of the sale proceeds/auction amount and held that there is no infirmity in the Order-in-Original passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs to that extent and therefore, there was a self-contradiction in the order of the ld.Commissioner (Appeals). 3. The respondent has also filed Cross Objections in the impugned matter. 4. The facts of the case are that the respondent is a Public Customs Bonded Warehouse where M/s APS Container warehoused seven (7) imported consignments of second hand rolling mill equipment in the Customs Bonded Warehouse during the period 1997-1999. M/s KHSL Industries Limited and APS Container, have also imported five (5) consignments and stored in the said warehouse. The job of transportation of the imported goods from the Barge to warehouse, was undertaken by the respondent under separate contract with M/s Malvika Steel Limited. M/s Malvika Steel Limited filed two Bills of Entry for ex- bond clearance of 1707 pcs. of pipes and 180 pcs. of valves on 4th October, 1999 & 31st December, 1999 respectively. Despite paying applicable duties, the goods were however not cleared from the warehouse. The r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pay to the custodian. The said order however contained no findings about the respondent's claim of payment of freight and other charges amounting to Rs.74,65,099/-. 12. In the Writ Petition W.P.No.3698 (W) of 2017 filed by the respondent before the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court, the Hon'ble High Court observed as under : "This is the third petition at the instance of the writ petitioner with regard to the claim on account of freight. The petitioner has other contentions also. The claim on account of freight has not been adjudicated upon by the authorities concerned. The impugned order does not return any finding as to why the claim of the petitioner on account of freight has been quantified as zero. In such circumstances, the impugned order is set aside. The Deputy Commissioner of Customs requested to consider and decide the claims of the petitioner in accordance with law" 13. In pursuance to the aforesaid direction of the Hon'ble High Court, the matter was once again heard by the adjudicating authority on 02.06.2017 and the order dated 03.07.2017 was issued where after appropriation of Rs.9,12,419/- as expenses towards sale, the balance amount was ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (d) where any goods in *]] and which * respect of which a bond has been executed under [section 59 [* have not been cleared for home consumption or [export] are not duly accounted for to the satisfaction of the proper officer, the proper officer may demand, and the owner of such goods shall forthwith pay, the full amount of duty chargeable on account of such goods together with [interest, fine and penalties] payable in respect of such goods. (2) If any owner fails to pay any amount demanded under (2) sub-section (1), the proper officer may, without prejudice to any other remedy, cause to be detained and sold, after notice to the owner (any transfer of the goods notwithstanding) such sufficient portion of his goods, if any, in the warehouse, as the said officer may [deem fit]. SECTION 150. Procedure for sale of goods and application of sale proceeds. (1) Where any goods not being confiscated goods are to be sold under any provisions of this Act, they shall, after notice to the owner thereof, be sold by public auction or by tender or with the consent of the owner in any other manner. (2) The proceeds of any such sale shall be applied ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n 150 of the Customs Act, 1962 as the issue attained finality as far as on this issue is concerned. In this regard, I also find from appellants' letter dated 16.06.2017 (Annexure-N) (Page-125) addressed to Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Import Bond Department, Custom House, Kolkata of the Customs Appeal, that they have also accepted apportionment of the amount under Section 150 of the Customs Act, 1962. Thus, I hold that there is no infirmity in the impugned order-in-original no.Kol/Cus/DC/2196/IB/2017/Port 03.07.2017, on this account." 20. In view of the law as laid down in terms of Section 150 of the Customs Act, 1962, the apportionment of the sale proceeds after defraying payment of the auction caused is the first priority, the next element to be considered is the freight and other charges payable in respect of the goods sold to the carriers. There is nothing wrong in the order of the ld.Commissioner (Appeals) allowing payment of freight expenses. 21. In so far as the question pertaining to the other expenses incurred by the warehouse-keeper, in case any amount remains after disbursement of the aforesaid expenses, the same shall be apportioned in terms of Section 150 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ra 17.1 is noted as under : "17.1 I find that on this account the appellant has submitted a statement of outstanding warehouse (rent) charges upto the period 30th June, 2007 [Ref.page-30 of the appeal petition). A consolidated bill no.1 [Ref.page-32 of the appeal petition] has also been submitted therein. However, no separate bills found available in the appeal petition. Therefore, the appellant is required to furnish each and every bills before the respondent, who will examine the authenticity thereof and applicability of the same under the category of 'other charges' under Section 150(2)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. Needless to mention that ample opportunity of personal hearing also needs to be given to the appellant." 26. The ld.Commissioner (Appeals) was, however, handicapped for want of "each and every" bills and therefore, remanded the matter to the lower authorities for examining the authenticity and applicability of the said category of other charges via provisions of Section 150(2)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. The respondent has challenged this remand pointing out that the ld.Commissioner (Appeals) was not vested with the power of remand. We are not in ....