Case Details: Muchipara Consumers Co-Operative Stores Ltd. vs. Union of India (2025) 36 Centax 211 (Del.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Prathiba M. Singh & Shail Jain, JJ.
- Shri S. Sunil, Adv., for the Petitioner.
- S/Shri Harpreet Singh, SSC with Jai Ahuja & Sanidhya Sharma, Advs., for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner, being the successful bidder in an e-auction of foreign-origin seized/confiscated cigarettes, participated subject to the terms and conditions of the auction, including timelines for deposit of the balance bid amount. After issuance of the acceptance letter, the petitioner sought data relating to the date of manufacture, packaging, import and other particulars of the cigarettes in view of ‘Circular No. 9/2017-Cus., dated 29-03-2017’. The petitioner thereafter sought refund of the earnest money deposit, which the Assistant Commissioner rejected on the ground that the Commissioner of Customs had already forfeited the earnest money deposit for failure to deposit the balance amount within the stipulated time. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) declined to entertain the challenge to the rejection of refund and observed that the matter was contractual in nature and that the original forfeiture order had been passed by the Commissioner of Customs. The matter was accordingly placed before the Delhi High Court.
High Court Held
The Delhi High Court held that the petitioner’s remedy against the order of the Assistant Commissioner rejecting the refund claim under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 could not be foreclosed merely because the Commissioner of Customs had earlier ordered forfeiture of the earnest money deposit. The Court observed that the Commissioner (Appeals) had declined to exercise jurisdiction on the erroneous premise that the dispute was contractual, and therefore the petitioner was entitled to pursue a statutory appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The Court further held that the CESTAT would be required to adjudicate the appeal comprehensively on merits, including examining whether the forfeiture of the earnest money deposit was in accordance with law. The petition was accordingly disposed of with a direction permitting the petitioner to file an appeal before the CESTAT.
List of Cases Cited
- Muchipara Consumers Co-Operative Stores Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner — W.P. (C) No. 5041 of 2022, decided on 28-3-2022 by Delhi High Court — Referred [Para 7]
- Muchipara Consumers Co-Operative Stores Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner — W.P. (C) No. 9301 of 2023, decided on 14-7-2023 by Delhi High Court — Referred [Para 8]
List of Departmental Clarification Cited
- C.B.E. & C. Circular No. 9/2017-Cus., dated 29-3-2017 [Paras 5, 6, 12]
