Case Law Details
Vedanta Limited (Formerly known as M/s. Sesa Sterlite Limited/Sesa Goa Limited) Vs Commissioner of Customs (Export) (CESTAT Kolkata)
This article explores a case where Vedanta Limited (formerly known as Sesa Goa Limited) contested a customs order due to a communication lapse. The case highlights the importance of proper communication procedures in customs matters and the rights of businesses to challenge such issues.
Background:
The case revolves around a shipping bill (000143/IOF/2008-09) finalized by the customs department on July 16, 2009. Vedanta claims they never received the official communication about this finalization, despite attempts to reach the authorities.
Vedanta’s Arguments:
Vedanta’s arguments included:
- Non-receipt of finalization notice: They maintained they never received the Office letter (C.No.VIII-CUS-51(708)-EXP/PDP/2008/7010) dated May 11, 2010, which informed them about the finalization.
- Communication attempts: Vedanta mentioned various attempts to contact officials regarding the missing notice.
- RTI confirmation: They referred to a Right to Information (RTI) response received from the Ministry of Finance in 2014. The response confirmed that the finalization letter was sent “by post” and the acknowledgement receipt mentioned it as “not received.”
Vedanta’s Claim:
Vedanta argued that the department failed to follow proper procedures for communicating the finalization order. They emphasized the lack of evidence proving successful service of the order.
Court’s Decision:
The court acknowledged the communication lapse and ruled in favor of Vedanta on the following points:
- Department’s responsibility: The court held the department responsible for not following proper procedures for communicating the finalization order.
- Issuing certified copy: The court directed the department to immediately issue a certified copy of the order upon receiving notification of this court order.
- Appeal rights: The court clarified that the date of issuing the certified copy will be considered the date of receipt by Vedanta. This allows them to file an appeal against the order within the stipulated timeframe.
Conclusion:
CESTAT’s order upholds the principles of transparency and due process by ensuring Vedanta receives the final order and has the opportunity to challenge it if necessary. This case also highlights the importance of proper communication procedures and record-keeping within the customs department.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT KOLKATA ORDER
The Appellant has filed the present Appeal being aggrieved by Order-in-Appeal No.16-17/CUS/CCP/2016 dated 28.07.2016, wherein the Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) has noted that the Shipping Bill No.000143/IOF/2008-09 dated 24.08.2008 has been finalized on 16.07. 2009 and the exporter had also been communicated about the finalization vide Office letter No.C.No.VIII-CUS-51(708)-EXP/PDP/2008/7010 dated 11.05.2010. The Ld. Counsel submits that this finalization letter has never been received by the Appellant. He takes us through various communications which they have addressed to the officials on the ground that this finalization was not received by them. He also takes us through the RTI filed by them on this issue and the reply received from the Ministry of Finance, DOR, Office of the Assistant Commissioner, Custom House, Paradeep vide letter No.C.No.VIII-CUS-12(13)PDP/2013/1804 dated 15/16.04.2014, wherein it is specified that the final assessment order letter in question was dispatched “by post” and in the acknowledgement receipt it is mentioned as “not received”. This shows that the Department has not followed proper procedure for communicating their finalized assessment order. The RTI reply shows that the final assessment order was sent by normal post and there is no evidence to the effect that this order was served on the Appellant.
2. Considering these facts, we direct the Department to issue certified copy of this assessment order to the appellant immediately on receipt of communication of this order. The date of issue of the certified copy will be taken as the date of receipt by the Appellant. Based on the same the Appellant would be at liberty to file Appeal before the concerned Commissioner(Appeals). The Appeal is disposed of thus.
(Dictated and pronounced in the open Court.)
Author Bio
