Disposed

Mohammed Shaheed v. Ass. Commissioner of Customs (Refund)

Kerala HC12 Nov 2014WP(C)/6477/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition filed for refund of excess customs duty. The Court directed the respondents to refund the amount within four weeks upon production of identity and account details, allowing them to verify existing records.

What did the court decide?

Refund of the excess amount to be effected within four weeks from the date of receipt of the judgment copy.

Mohammed Shaheed Vs Ass. Commissioner of Customs (Refund) — Customs and Excise | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014/21ST KARTHIKA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 6477 of 2014 (H)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

-----------------------

¶8

MOHAMMED SHAHEED, PERIYEDUKKA HOUSE, MULLERIYA P.O., KASARGOD DIST-671 543, NOW RESIDING AT R.NO.32, 1ST FLOOR, ZIA MAJUM BUILDING, N.M.JOSHI MARG, MUMBAI-400 013.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.P.A.AUGUSTIAN SRI.M.A.BABY

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

--------------------------

¶12

1. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (REFUND), CUSTOMS HOUSE, COCHIN-9.

¶13

2. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CUSTOMS HOUSE, COCHIN-9.

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.SAIBY JOSE KIDANGOOR

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-11-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

msv/

¶17

WP(C).No. 6477 of 2014 (H)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶20

EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 06/04/06 IN WP(C)NO.10823 OF 2006. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 12/9/06 IN W.A.NO.1596 OF 2006. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER-IN-ORIGINAL NO.51/06 DATED 07/08/06.

¶21

EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE BILL OF ENTRY AND TR6 CHALLAN.

¶22

EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE DEMURRAGE BILL DATED 31/08/06.

¶23

EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER-IN-APPEAL NO.478/07 DATED 24/09/07. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE REFUND CLAIM DATED 30/10/07.

¶24

EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL ORDER NO.771-782/08 DATED 11/7/08. EXT.P9: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 01/12/07.

¶25

EXT.P10: TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER DATED 18/12/08. EXT.P11: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20/3/09.

¶26

EXT.P12: TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.802/35/2004-CD DATED 08/12/04.

¶27

EXT.P13: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 26/3/2009 IN WPC.NO.33064 OF 2008.

¶28

EXT.P14: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17/7/09 IN WPC.NO.19215 OF 2009. EXT.P15: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 08/3/10 IN WPC.NO.26503/2009. EXT.P16: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER-IN-ORIGINAL NO.86/2010 DATED 11/5/10. EXT.P17: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER-IN-APPEAL NO.67/2013 DATED 19/09/13.

¶29

EXT.P18: TRUE COPIES OF THE COMMUNICATION MADE BY THE PETITIONER AND THE COUNSEL.

¶30

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE.

Ms v/

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

¶36

--------------------------------------------

¶37

W.P.(C).No. 6477 of 2014

¶38

¶39

Dated this the 12^th day of November, 2014

¶40

-----------------------

¶41

The writ petition is filed for refund of excess amount which

¶42

was paid as per Ext.P3 order for clearance of a used Toyota car in

¶43

2006 from abroad. The appellate authority set aside Ext.P16 order and ordered that refund to be granted to the petitioner as an when petitioner produce the necessary document and other evidences in support of the claim as envisaged under Section 27 of the Customs

¶44

Act, 1962. The petitioner submits that he has produced all the documents.

¶45

The petitioner points out Paragraph 11 of of the Counter affidavit. It is stated that certain documents were received

¶46

including Bill or Entry and TR-6 Challan and signed pre-receipt. It is stated that the petitioner demanded in the letter to send any further communication by the Department to his Mumbai address.

¶47

Thereafter the petitioner was contacted in the Bombay address since postal authorities returned letter stating that 'address not

¶48

¶49

W.P.(C).No.6477 of 2014

¶50

known'. The Department was unable to refund the amount.

¶51

The petitioner submits that he is available in Kerala and

¶52

address is known to the Department. It seems that the petitioner submitted the xerox copies of Bill of Entry and TR-6 Challan and signed pre-receipt.

¶53

It is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel that

¶54

petitioner had produced only attested copy of bill of entry and challan.

¶55

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the originals of the Bill of entry and Challan is with the Department and Department can verify the same from their records itself. Admittedly the petitioner is entitled to refund. Therefore the Department shall verify the same from their records. It is to be noted that petitioner has produced Ext.P4, bill of entry and challan. Therefore, further insistence of production Ext.P4 appears to be a technical argument as the respondents have no case that Ext.P4 produced by the petitioner is bogus or fabricated for claiming

¶56

W.P.(C).No.6477 of 2014

¶57

¶58

refund.

¶59

In view of the above, on producing identity and account

¶60

details, refund shall be effected to the petitioner within a period of four weeks. It is open for the respondents to verify the veracity of Exts.P4 and copy furnished by the petitioner. Needful shall be done

¶61

within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall appear before the 1^st

¶62

respondent with documents to prove the identity and account details on 24.11.2014.

¶63

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶64

Sd/

¶65

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE

¶66

jm/

Mohammed Shaheed v. Ass. Commissioner of Customs (Refund)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Shaheed v. Ass. Commissioner of Customs (Refund)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.N.J.Thomas and Co. Vs Union of India

Ambujakshan Vs the State of Kerala

Suryakant Purushotham Vs the Registrar

K.P. Abdul Kader Vs the Perinthalmanna Municipality

Jassim Naz A.J. Vs the Regional Passport Officer

M/S. Subham Freight Terminal Vs the Chairman