Commissioner Of Customs Export vs Royal Cushion Vinyl Products Ltd
2024 Latest Caselaw 24600 Bom

Bombay High Court

Commissioner Of Customs Export vs Royal Cushion Vinyl Products Ltd on 21 August, 2024

Author: K.R. Shriram

Bench: K.R. Shriram

2024:BHC-OS:12781


                             ppn                             1/2                  1.cuapp-44.24.doc




                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        Digitally signed
                                          ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                        by PRACHI
        PRACHI          PRANESH
        PRANESH         NANDIWADEKAR
        NANDIWADEKAR
                        Date: 2024.08.22
                        15:02:00 +0530      CUSTOMS APPEAL NO.44 OF 2024

             The Commissioner of Customs, Export                                  ....Appellant
                            V/s.
             Royal Cushion Vinyl Products Ltd.                                    ...Respondent
                                                            ----
             Ms. Maya Majumdar for appellant.
             Mr. P. K. Shetty for respondent.
                                                            ----
                                                         CORAM : K.R. SHRIRAM &
                                                                 JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.

DATE : 21st AUGUST 2024

P.C. :

1 This appeal though listed for directions, we are informed that it

is listed under wrong caption and counsel requests that the appeal be taken

up for admission.

2 This appeal is filed under Section 130(1) of the Customs Act,

1962 impugning the order dated 9th November 2021 passed by the Central

Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) dismissing revenue's

appeal.

3 The Adjudicating Authority in its order dated 28 th February

2013 had not imposed the redemption fine on the ground that goods were

not available for confiscation. Against that order, an appeal had been filed

ppn 2/2 1.cuapp-44.24.doc

by revenue before the CESTAT.

4 The CESTAT dismissed the appeal upholding the order-in-

original passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Export), Mumbai

because admittedly the goods were not available for confiscation.

5 Ms. Majumdar in fairness also agrees that the finding of the

CESTAT in the impugned order that the goods were neither seized nor

released provisionally on execution of provisional release bond was correct.

In view thereof, we agree with the finding of the CESTAT that the judgment

in Western Components Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi 1

was on different sets of facts. In Western Components, the goods were

released on an application made by the Importer and on Importer executing

a bond whereas in case in hand, neither the goods were seized nor released

provisionally on execution of provisional release bond.

6 Therefore, no substantial question of law arises. Appeal

dismissed.

    (JITENDRA JAIN, J.)                                 (K.R. SHRIRAM, J.)




1   2000 (115) E.L.T. 278 (SC)