Pashupati Enterprises vs Commissioner of Customs (Port)

Soumitra Pal, J.—The Court : Let affidavits of service filed today kept on record.

In this writ petition the Petitioner has prayed for a direction upon the Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata, Respondent No. 1 to send a report and has prayed for a direction upon the Assistant Commissioner of Customs Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh, Respondent No. 2 indicating licit clearance of goods along with sample in accordance with law under the Bill of Entry being No. 444772 dated 2-12-2008 and Bill of Entry No. 449993 dated 7-1-2009. Prayer has also been made for a direction upon the said Respondents to release the goods seized.

I find that the goods were imported under the said Bills of Entry by M/s. Shiva Enterprises, the Respondent No. 4. Thereafter, the goods were purchased by the Petitioner as would be evident from Annexures ''P-2 & 3''. Upon purchase the Petitioner sold the goods to M/s. Shyam Traders at Gorakhpur as would be evident from Annexure ''P-6''. Incidentally, Shyam Traders is not a party in the writ petition. I find on 25-1-2009 that the Customs Authorities at Gorakhpur had seized the goods on the ground of misdeclaration. The Petitioner No. 2 by summon u/s 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 dated 5-2-2009 was directed to appear before the authorities on 9-2-2009 regarding the enquiry in relation to the said seizure. Summon was also issued upon the Director of the Respondent No. 4.

It appears that after such seizure M/s. Shyam Traders by a declaration dated 17th February, 2009 had declared that they have no objection to take and/or claim release of 191 bundles of the goods which have been seized by the Customs Authorities at Gorakhpur under Seizure Case No. 10/09 dated 25-1-2009, by M/s. Pashupati Enterprises, Kolkata, that is, the Petitioner. Learned advocate appearing for the Petitioner submits that in view of the declaration by M/s. Shyam Traders since the Petitioner is the owner of the goods, appropriate order, as prayed for, may be passed.

Admittedly, M/s. Shiva Enterprises, the Respondent No. 4, is the importer and the Petitioner was a purchaser who had subsequently sold it to M/s. Shyam Traders who is not a party aggrieved. Since he is neither the importer nor the person from whom the goods have been seized, there is no merit in the writ petition. The writ petition is dismissed.

No order as to costs.

Urgent xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the appearing parties on priority basis.