TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (7) TMI 96
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The petitioners entered into four contracts for purchase of aluminium ingots from various foreign parties of Singapore. Those were purchased from the warehouses of London Metal Exchange and were of Indian origin. The vessel carrying aluminium ingots arrived at Calcutta Port in November, 2000. (b) The goods were in four consignments and the petitioners filed two Bills of Entries for the two of those consignments on the basis of the non-negotiable copies of Bill of Lading. The Customs Authority, however, did not allow release of the aforesaid consignments under duty-free scheme on the ground that those goods were of Indian origin and were necessarily dutiable. Since those two consignments for whic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct with the overseas exporter. When the second writ petitioner presented the Bill of Entry with original Bill of Lading, the Customs Authority refused to release the goods in favour of the second writ petitioner on the ground of pendency of the first writ application over the said subject matter. Hence, the second writ application was filed by the second writ petitioner praying a direction for release of the goods in its favour. 6. Therefore, so far the first writ application is concerned the question is whether the writ petitioners are entitled to release of the consignments without payment of duty by virtue of Advance License in their favour. 7. There is no dispute that the writ petitioners had been importing aluminium ingots duty-f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....decisions : (i) M/s. East India Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs reported in 1983 (13) E.L.T. 1342 (S.C.) = AIR 1962 SC 1893, (ii) Sandeep Agarwal v. Collector of Customs reported in 1992 (62) E.L.T. 528, (iii) Enterprise International Limited v. Collector of Customs, 1994 (69) E.L.T. 453, (iv) Motisons Internationals v. CC, Cochin reported in 1998 (74) ECR 63, (v) Bengal Iron Corporation v. Commercial Tax Officer reported in 1993 (66) E.L.T. 13, (vi) Arviva Industries Ltd. v.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o get the release of first, third and fourth consignments duty-free in terms of the Advance License as they are in possession of the negotiable Bills of Lading in respect of those consignments. 14. So far the second writ application is concerned, the question is whether the second writ petitioner has acquired title to the second consignment which is the subject matter of the first writ application by virtue of subsequent Bill of Lading acquired by such petitioner. There is no dispute that initially agreement was entered into between the foreign exporter and the first writ petitioners over the second consignment. The private respondent in the second writ application, which is a unit of the writ petitioners in the first writ application ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed questions of fact and should not be adjudicated in this writ application, I am not impressed by such submission. 16. It appears that during the pendency of the second writ application, the private respondent No. 5, a unit of writ petitioners in first writ application has filed a civil suit but merely by filing a civil suit the right of the second writ petitioner cannot be taken away. Admittedly, those writ petitioners did not make payment of the money by virtue of agreement and as such, they had no title to the property. The foreign exporter has subsequently transferred the goods in favour of the second writ petitioner. The moment original Bill of Lading has been placed before the Customs Authority, it is its duty to release the goods....