Disposed

M/S.Empire Exports v. the Commissioner of Customs

Madras HC3 Nov 2017WP/27890/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In these writ petitions, the Court directed disposal without granting immediate release of imported goods. The Court held that exemption pleas are factual and must be canvassed before Customs authorities, precluding judicial fact-finding on product-specific eligibility.

What did the court decide?

Writ petitions disposed; petitioners directed to approach Customs authorities with regard to the plea of exemption.

M/S.Empire Exports Vs the Commissioner of Customs — Madras HC (2017) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 03.11.2017 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM

¶4

M/s.Empire Exports Rep by its Proprietor Mr.Bimal Kumar Modi 1, Govind Chandra Dhar Lane Kolkatta – 700 001. ... Petitioner in WP No.27890/2008 M/s.Bajarang Expo Rep by its Proprietor Mr.Mahendra Kumar Modi 163, Rabindra Sarani Second Floor Kolkatta – 700 007. ... Petitioner in WP No.28061/2008 Vs. 1.The Commissioner of Customs [Seaport-Imports] Custom House, No.60, Rajaji Salai Chennai – 600 001. 2.The Assistant Commissioner of Customs Group-1, Custom House No.60, Rajaji Salai Chennai – 600 001. ... Respondents in both WPs

¶5

Prayer in WP No.27890/2008: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to release the goods viz., 88,800 mts., of Betel Nuts Split (2^nd Grade) imported vide Bill of Entry No.869479, dated 17.10.2008, by extending the full exemption contained in Notification No.67/2006, dated 30.06.2006.

¶6

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶7

Prayer in WP No.28061/2008: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to release the goods viz.,13,365 mts., of Betel Nuts Split Processed imported vide Bill of Entry No.880065, dated 31.10.2008, by extending the full exemption contained in Notification No.67/2006-Cus, dated 30.06.2006.

¶8

For Petitioners

¶9

The petitioners in both the writ petitions seek for release of the goods, viz., 88,800 mts. and 13,365 mts. of Betel Nuts Split by granting exemptions. At the time when the writ petition was admitted on 25.11.2008, no interim orders were granted and notices alone were ordered in the interim applications, wherein, the petitioners sought for a direction for provisional release.

¶10

2.It is not clear as to what has happened in the interregnum, i.e., during the pendency of the writ petitions. That apart, the goods are perishable in nature and the quantities involved are also huge. With all these probabilities, the goods ought to have been released. If the release of the goods were provisional, then the petitioners are entitled to canvass their plea of exemption before the authority, who shall, in turn, consider such claims in accordance with law. This is so because, this Court cannot made a fact-finding exercise to ascertain as to whether the particular product comes under an exemption notification. Though, some legal interpretation is sought to be given by the writ petitioners, essentially the plea of exemption revolves on facts, which may be product-specific, country-specific, user-specific etc.

¶11

3.Therefore, the petitioners have to canvass the plea of exemption first before the authority and then, exhaust all the remedies available under the Act.

¶12

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶13

4.With the above direction, the writ petitions are disposed of, leaving it open to the writ petitioners to approach the authorities with regard to the plea of exemption. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶14

Sd/-

¶15

Assistant Registrar(CS IV)

¶16

//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
maya
To
1.The Commissioner of Customs [Seaport-Imports]
Custom House, No.60, Rajaji Salai
Chennai – 600 001.
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Customs
Group-1, Custom House
No.60, Rajaji Salai
Chennai – 600 001.
+2 ccs to M/s.A.P.Srinivas Advocate sr 78476,78475
W.P.Nos. 27890 & 28061 of 2008
ariv
aa24/11/2017

¶17

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

M/S.Empire Exports v. the Commissioner of Customs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Empire Exports v. the Commissioner of Customs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tvl.Madhu Jayanthi Vs The Assistant Commissioner

M/s.Bhavanimatha Electrical Vs The State Tax Officer

S.Arputharaj, Vs The Deputy Commissioner

M/S. Sri Murugan Agency Vs the Commercial Tax Officer

M/S.Asia Overseans Vs the Commissioner of Customs

R.S.Sivaprakasm Vs Union of India, Rep. by Its