Case Law Details
Mumtaz Mehboob Munshi Vs Commissioner of Customs (Calcutta High Court)
Calcutta High Court held that warehousing agency namely CWC (Central Warehousing Corporation) is statutorily entitled to demand and collect rent for the storage on the date when goods were entrusted to the custody of CWC.
Facts- The appellant purchased on high sea sales basis zinc ingots the said product which were stuffed into eight containers, were ceased by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, (DRI) on the allegation that the goods were to be diverted to the local market instead of sending the same to the supporting manufacturers for manufacture of goods to be exported.
During proceeding, the appellant unconditionally accepted the order paid the entire amount which was demanded in the order-in-original namely fine in lien of the confiscation, duty, interest and penalty. After the payment of the amounts as quantified in the order-in-original dated 05.01.2018, seven out of the eight containers which were in the custody in the DRI were released to the appellant however one of the container was not released as it was in a bonded warehouse of the Central Warehousing Corporation (CWC).
The said container was not released on the ground that unless and until the appellant pays the warehousing charges/rent to the CWC, the same cannot be released. By communication dated 29.03.2019, the Assistant Commissioner of Customs directed the appellant to pay the charges since the goods were kept from October 2002 and the amendment to Section 68 of the Act made in 2016 would not be applicable. The appellant had accordingly paid the amount under protest on 24.08.2019 and thereafter filed the writ petition for the aforementioned relief.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
