SCA/5628/2002 of JAYTICK INTERMEDIATES PVT. LTD Vs UNION OF INDIA on 13 September 2002

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 5628 of 2002

For Approval and Signature:

Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE

and

Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA

============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the concerned : NO Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribunal/Tribunals? -------------------------------------------------------------- JAYTICK INTERMEDIATES PVT. LTDVersus UNION OF INDIA -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1. Special Civil Application No. 5628 of 2002 MR BHARAT T RAO for Petitioner No. 1 MR DN PATEL for Respondent No. 1 .......... for Respondent No. 2-4 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE

and

MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA

ORAL JUDGEMENT

(Per : MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA)

1 Mr.B.T.Rao, learned Advocate for the petitioner seeks permission to delete respondent no.4 - Maharashtra State Warehousing Corporation. Permission granted.

2 Rule.

Mr.D.N.Patel, Senior Central Government Standing Counsel appears and waives service of rule on behalf of the respondents. At the request of the learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties this petition is taken up for final hearing.

3 The petitioner has challenged the auction notice issued by the Chief Commissioner of Customs, New Customs House, Mumbai, whereby the goods warehoused under Bond No.MS06-599 dated 8.2.2001 under Bill Entry No.168220 dated 30.1.2001 were required to be auctioned as the petitioner has failed to extend the bond period which had expired on 7.2.2002. Mr.B.T.Rao, learned Advocate for the petitioner states that though there was default on the part of the petitioner in making application for extension, today the petitioner is ready and willing to pay the amount payable under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. It is submitted that as the petitioner is facing financial crunch, the petitioner would like to have some time for making payment. On 26.8.2002, respondent no.3 was directed to determine the amount of duty and other amount payable by the petitioner. Accordingly, vide communication dated 12.9.2002 the amount has been calculated at Rs.4,17,565/- being the duty assessed plus interest of Rs.1,56,501/- (calculated upto 30th September,2002). It is submitted by Mr.Rao that the petitioner shall make payment in a lump-sum on or before 30.11.2002, and the petitioner is ready and willing to pay the interest for the further period from 1.10.2002 to 30.11.2002.

4. In light of the aforesaid statement made on behalf of the petitioner the respondents are directed not to proceed with the disposal of goods as stated in notice issued under Section 72(2) of the Act on 4.4.2002. The petitioner shall make payment in a lump sum of Rs.4,17,565/- plus interest for period 1.10.2002 to 30.11.2002 (as computed by respondent No.3). The bond period shall stand extended accordingly. In the event of failure on part of the petitioner to make payment as aforesaid it will be open to the respondents to proceed with the disposal of goods in terms of aforestated notice.

5. The petition stands allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule made absolute accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.

��� (A.R.Dave, J) (D.A.Mehta,J)

m.m.bhatt