EAST WEST EXPORTERS Vs. ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS the points involved in these writ appeals are common, they are disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) THESE writ appeals arise out of the common order of the learned Single Judge made in W.P. Nos. 1012 and 1013 of 1993, directing that the goods in each of the cases should be allowed to be cleared within 10 days from the date of payment of 50% of the duty in each case plus Bank Guarantee for 25% of the duty and a personal bond for the balance of 25%. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to in this judgment as per their array in the writ petitions.

(3.) THE respondents in the writ petitions filed a counter affidavit contending that a Value Based Advance Licence dated 25-9-1992 was issued by the Joint Chief Controller, Imports and Exports in favour of M/s. Indo International Limited, Madras. THE total value of the licence was Rs. 64, 89, 000/-. THE licence holder was permitted to import 21 items of goods mentioned in the annexure to the licence. THE licence holder had complied with the export obligations and was, therefore, enabled to transfer the licence. Actually the licence was transferred in parts to several persons and ultimately it was transferred to the writ petitioners. A bond or legal undertaking was executed by the licence holder as contemplated in paragraph 118 of the Hand Book of Procedure for 1992-97 and the same was redeemed by the licensing authority on 23-10-1992. THEreafter, there was no chance of any amendments in the licence relating to enhancement in the C.I.F. value or by way of addition to the licenced items. THE original licence did not include the item of Staple Pins imported by the petitioners. However, the words "Staple Pins" have been included in the annexure by way of an amendment and suspicion arose in respect of the said amendment and investigations were initiated in this regard. THE respondents further contended that, the investigationsprima faciedisclosed a fraud in making the unauthorised amendment ante dating the same-to avoid the implications of the redemption of the undertaking on 23-10-1992. It was also contended in the counter affidavit that there are chances of the goods being confiscated under Section 111 of the Customs Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), and therefore, it would be improper to allow the goods to be cleared without payment of duty.