RINTU BASTIAN Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. D. Sahu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned counsel for the respondents in the Customs Department.

(2.) The petitioner is a trader in raw rubber which he procures from the small registered rubber growers in the Northeastern region and operates his business in the name and style of M/s Madona Agencies having its place of business at TRP Road, Machkhowa, Guwahati. In course of the business, there was a seizure under Sec. 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short 'the Act of 1962') by the Customs authorities in respect of 2840.87 kg of raw rubber and the estimated rubber value of the seized raw rubber was stated to be Rs.5,68,174.00 @ of Rs.200.00 per kg. The seizure under Sec. 110 of the Act of 1962 resulted in a confiscation under Sec. 105 of the Act of 1962 as per the order dtd. 28/3/2013 of the Additional Commissioner of Customs (Prev.), Shillong. Upon the seized goods being confiscated, they were subjected to an auction on 30/10/2014 and in the auction, the seized goods fetched a price of Rs.1,45,000.00. Later on the seizure as well as the confiscation was set aside by the order dtd. 29/12/2014 in Order-in-appeal No. 76/CUS(A)/GHY/14 of the Commissioner (Appeal), Customs and Central Excise, Guwahati.

(3.) In the resultant circumstance, the petitioner claimed for a refund of the value of the goods that were seized and confiscated. The respondents in the Customs Department had offered the petitioner an amount of Rs.1,55,000.00which includes the auction price of Rs.1,45,000.00 plus Rs.10,000.00 penalty that was earlier imposed. Being dissatisfied, the present writ petition is instituted with a claim that upon the seizure and the confiscation being set aside, the petitioner is entitled for a refund of the complete value of the goods and not the value as per the auction. Accordingly, reference is made to inventories of seized goods wherein the estimated value of the seized goods was stated to be Rs.5,68,174.00.