AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Jaichandren, J.—By consent of the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, as well as the learned Counsel appearing on
behalf of the Respondents, the writ petition had been taken up for hearing and disposal.
Heard Mr. V. Raghavachari, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Mr. T.R. Senthil Kumar, learned Central
Government Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents.
This writ petition has been filed praying for a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to quash the impugned proceedings of the third Respondent, dated
23.05.2011, and to direct the Respondents to re-examine the machinery and the goods covered under invoice Nos. 2, 5, 6, 7 and 8, and to
release the same.
During the course of the arguments in the writ petition, in W.P. No. 12953 of 2011, interim orders had been passed by this Court, on
09.06.2011 and 14.06.2011, in M.P. No. 2 of 2011. Accordingly, Superintendence Company of India (Private) Limited had filed a certificate of
inspection, dated 15.06.2011, giving the details with regard to the place of origin of the goods in question and the valuation of the goods. Both the
Petitioner, as well as the Respondents had agreed to accept the said certificate of inspection, dated 15.06.2011.
The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents had submitted that the Petitioner was liable to pay the customs duty, as assessed
by the Respondents, as well as the anti dumping duty, as per the notification No. 01/2010 -Customs, dated 08.01.2010, and on the basis of the
certificate of inspection submitted by the Superintendence Company of India (Private) Limited, dated 15.06.2011. The Petitioner shall pay the
customs duty, as well as the anti dumping duty, as demanded by the Respondents, before the goods in question are released. He had also
submitted that any payment made by the Petitioner, as customs duty and as anti dumping duty, would be subject to the final orders to be passed in
the adjudication proceedings, by the authorities concerned.
The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner had submitted that the Petitioner would pay the entire amount of customs duty payable and
would also furnish sufficient bank guarantees for the anti dumping duty payable by the Petitioner on the same day, when the Respondents intimate
the Petitioner after quantifying the anti dumping duty to be paid by the Petitioner, by appropriate instructions to the Syndicate Bank, K.R. Circle,
Mysore.
In such circumstances, the Petitioner shall pay a sum of Rs. 62,85,774/-, in respect invoice Nos. 2, 5 and 6, and a sum of Rs. 58,85,895/-, in
respect of invoice Nos. 7 and 8, as customs duty. Further, the Petitioner shall furnish sufficient Bank Guarantees for a sum of Rs. 89,09,000/-, in
respect of invoice Nos. 2, 5 and 6, and Rs. 64,26,287/-, in respect of invoice Nos. 7 and 8, as anti dumping duty to the satisfaction of the third
Respondent. On the Petitioner complying with the above conditions, the goods in question, relating to the invoice Nos. 2, 5, 6, 7 and 8, shall be
released by the Respondents.
If the anti dumping duty is found to be exceeding the said Bank Guarantees furnished by the Petitioner, the said amount would also be paid by
the Petitioner, as demanded by the Respondents. The adjudication proceedings relating to the issues in question, shall be completed, within a
period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.