Court Denies Writ Petition, Reaffirms Need to Exhaust Statutory Remedies in Customs Dispute.
16 December 2024
Custom Duty >> Tax Laws
In Pragati Gold Pvt. Ltd. v/s Union of India & Others., the petitioner challenges the Order-in-Original (O-I-O) issued by the Commissioner of Customs (II), Mumbai, on 24 August 2023, concerning gold consignments. The petition argues that the findings in the order were perverse and that an appeal would be financially burdensome due to the required pre-deposit. The petition emphasizes that no alternative remedy exists and thus seeks relief from the court.
However, the court emphasized that the petitioner failed to substantiate the claim of having no alternate remedy, especially since the impugned order is appealable to the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The court noted that the usual rule of exhausting statutory remedies must apply unless exceptional circumstances exist, such as a violation of natural justice or jurisdictional errors. The petitioner’s contention that the findings in the order were perverse was found to be a disputed factual issue, which could be addressed in an appeal. The court also rejected the claim about the inability to arrange the pre-deposit, given the petitioner’s substantial business turnover.
The court ultimately decided not to entertain the writ petition and emphasized that the petitioner should pursue an appeal. Should the petitioner file an appeal within four weeks, the tribunal was advised to consider the delay due to the pendency of this petition.