Party cannot be deprived of Statutory Right for fault of public body on which it has no control: Bombay HC directs CESTAT to submit Statement of Case [Read Order]

“A party should not be deprived of a statutory right for no fault of its own, but for the fault of a public body over which it has no control.”

The Bombay High Court directed the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Mumbai to submit the statement of the case.

Pursuant to the directions passed by the Apex Court, the petitioner, Asit C. Mehta Financial Services Limited (previously known as Nucleus Netsoft and GIS (India) Limited) had furnished a Bank Guarantee of twenty-six lakhs in favour of Prothonotary and Senior Master, Bombay High Court. Against furnishing of the said Bank Guarantee, Respondent No2 (Commissioner of Customs (Preventive)) and Respondent No3(Union of India) refunded an amount of Rupees fifty lakhs that petitioner had deposited during the course of investigation.

The Court raised certain substantial questions of law and directed Respondent No.1, (CESTAT) to send the statement of case to the Court as expeditiously as possible and Respondent No.1 has not sent the statement of the case till date. The Petitioners have been dutifully renewing the Bank Guarantee since 2002 and till date incurred about Rupees ten lakhs to keep the Bank Guarantee alive.

Section 130(A)(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 provides time limit of 120 days to submit the statement of facts. An amicus curie was also appointed by the Court regarding the case.

A Bench consisting of observed that “The time limit of 120 days prescribed in Section 130(A)(4) of the Customs Act, in our view, should be construed as being directory only and not imperative. The CESTAT (Respondent No.1) is a judicial body and over its actions Respondent No.2 has no control.”

“Therefore, Respondent No.1 has no excuse for not filing the statement of case at least with regard of which the petitioner is herein. and Respondent No.2 shall, within two weeks of this order being uploaded, give all details to Respondent No.1.”

The Court granted relief to the petitioner by stating that “After receiving the statement of facts from CESTAT, if the Customs Application is not disposed within one year, petitioner may apply again to court for return of the Bank Guarantee and substituting it with some satisfactory security.”

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

Support our journalism by subscribing to TaxscanAdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.