IN RE : THE JAMMU AND KASHMIR GRANT OF PERMIT FOR RESETTLEMENT IN (OR PERMANENT RETURN TO) THE STATE BILL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Counsel appearing for the Union of India is seeking time to reply because at length the Counsel for the petitioner has argued out the whole case and he has mainly highlighted that the petitioner is going to establish Mega Power Plant of 1800 MW, in Phase-I and Phase-II for 1200 MW and subsequently for 600 MW. It is also contended by the Counsel for the petitioner that they have imported capital goods for installation of the Mega Power Plant, which are exempted by the Government Notification dated 17th March, 2012. The validity of this exemption initially was up to 36 months, but, by virtue of the amendment dated 17th April, 2014, the said exemption is valid for 60 months, i.e., up to 15th January, 2017 for this petitioner because the certificate was given on 16th January, 2012. This certificate is known as "provisional mega power status certificate". Thus, the goods imported are exempted goods from the payment of Customs duty under the Customs Act, 1962. It is obvious that the Mega Power Plant is to be installed and therefore, the capital goods are to be kept in a warehouse either in public or private. Necessary permission has been obtained by this petitioner to keep this duty free imported goods in private warehouse under Section 58 of the Act, 1962. The import was started from July, 2011. They were kept at private warehouse and as the work of installation of Mega Power Plant was going on and simultaneously ex-bonding process was also taking place and therefore, some goods were to be retained in private warehouse for more than one year and therefore, Section 61 of the Customs Act, 1962 come into the picture. Looking Section 61(1)(b) to be read with proviso (i)(B) of the Act, 1962, there is also a provision for extension of the time limit beyond the period of one year for retaining the goods in warehouse. It is argued in detail by the Counsel for the petitioner that necessary applications were preferred in advance, initially before Commissioner of Customs and thereafter, before Chief Commissioner of Customs. Last application preferred before the Chief Commissioner of Customs is dated 22nd October, 2013, which is at Annexure-9 to the memo of the present petition. Nobody knows what is the decision and what is the outcome of the decision, at least, not this petitioner. Nothing is known to the petitioner in writing.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner further submitted that there is an application preferred for getting stay against the coercive action which may be taken by the respondent authorities for seizure of the warehoused, exempted goods at Tori Warehouse, Chandwa, District Latehar, State of Jharkhand and has submitted that let the matter be adjourned any day so that it can be finally decided till then the stay, as prayed for, in I.A. No. 848 of 2015, may kindly be granted. I.A. No. 848 of 2015

(3.) Having heard Counsels for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case especially :