1996 (6) TMI 88

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ribunal, Eastern [Bench], without any further delay and also for a direction on the respondents to forthwith release the goods being 16,000 pieces of `F.K. Brand' Pillow Block Bearings against provisional assessment and furnishing of P.D. Bond without any further delay. The facts leading to the filing of this application are stated as follows : On or about 7th May, 1994 the petitioner company entered into a contract with M/s. CAP Enterprise Company of Hongkong for the supply of 1,21,000 pieces of `F.K. Brand' Pillow Block Bearings (hereinafter referred to as the said goods). On or about 2-8-1994 the said goods arrived at the Port of Calcutta, whereupon the petitioner duly filed Bill of Entry for home consumption with all related paper....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mmissioner of Customs, SIB, inter alia, alleging why the value of the goods shall not be determined on the basis of the value as indicated in Column (3) of Paragraph 7(f) of the show cause notice and why the subject goods shall not be confiscated under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962 and penal action shall not be taken against the petitioners under Section 112(a) of the said Act. The writ petitioner has admittedly replied to the said show cause notice. A personal hearing was also given to the writ petitioner. 4.By an order dated 24-12-1994 the Commissioner of Customs Calcutta, passed an order by rejecting the submissions of the writ petitioner and confirmed that the said goods were liable to confiscation under Section 111(m) of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to dispose of the matter within the time specified in the order of remand. Mr. Sarkar appearing on behalf of the Customs Authority also admitted before me that no final order has yet been passed by the Adjudicating Authority in spite of the order of the Tribunal in which a specific direction was given to the Adjudicating Authority to dispose of the matter within three months from the date of receiving a copy of the order of the Tribunal. 7.However, Mr. Sarkar submits before me that if three weeks time is granted to the Authority, final order can be passed within such time. Mr. Sen, appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner, did not raise any objection as to the grant of extension of time to pass a final order in compliance with the ord....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... aside by the CEGAT and considering the fact further that the order of CEGAT to the Adjudicating Authority in the year 1994 to dispose of the matter within 3 months from the date of receiving a copy of its order was not followed and after the order of remand no final order has yet been passed by the Adjudicating Authority, I am of the view that in the facts and circumstances of this case as stated above the interim direction for release of the goods in the manner passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 5-2-1992 in the case of Sheheol Booring v. Union of India & Others should also be made in this case. Accordingly, a direction is given to the Commissioner of Customs to release the goods in the following manner : "The goods in question shal....