Petitioner challenged the threat of encashing a bank guarantee furnished for customs assessment. The standing counsel assured the court that no coercive action would be taken until the appeal period expired based on CBEC instructions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
TUESDAY, THE 7TH JUNE 2011 / 17TH JYAISHTA 1933
WP(C).No. 13627 of 2011(C)
PETITIONER(S):
M/S. INTEGRAL ASSOCIATES, 405 A, VATCHAKKAL LANE, EDAVANAKKAD P.O., ERNAKULAM-682 502, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, ARSHAD K.S.
BY ADV. SRI.P.RADHAKRISHNAN (1) SRI.MADHU RADHAKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT(S):
ADV. SRI.JOHN VARGHESE,SC,CEN.BOARD OF EXCIS SRI. THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J
....................................................... W.P.(C).13627/2011
.............................................. Dated this the 7th day of June, 2011
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayer:-
Issue a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent not to encash the bank guarantee mentioned in Ext.P3 order or receive amounts under the same until the stay application preferred in the appeal is disposed of.
W.P.(C).13627/11
2
petitioner are far beyond the track of truth and that, no such coercive steps are being pursued by the respondents, that too before the expiry of the appeal period. The stand of the respondents is reflected from paragraph 2 and 3 of the statement which reads as follows:-
W.P.(C).13627/11
3
Tribunal, as there are clear instruction for the department issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs vide Circular No.788/21/2004 CX dated 25.5.2004. Hence it is submitted that the bank guarantee will not be invoke without awaiting for the appeal period and further action in this regard will be taken only in accordance with the decision of the appellate authorities.
In the above circumstances, this Court finds that no further orders are warranted in this writ petition. The submission made from the part of the respondents is recorded and the matter is closed accordingly.
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, Judge
mrcs
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the court should issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to encash the bank guarantee or receive amounts under it before the stay application in the appeal is disposed of.
Whether the department's threat to enforce the bank guarantee constitutes coercive steps that warrant judicial intervention.
M/s. Integral Associates, represented by its proprietor, Arshad K.S.
The Commissioner of Customs, Customs House, Wellington Island, Kochi
The Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Imports), Customs House, Wellington Island, Kochi
P.R. Ramachandra Menon
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
