(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI) We have heard learned advocate Mr.Deven Parikh, assisted by learned advocate Mr.Nirav Shah for the petitioner and learned Assistant Solicitor General of India Mr.P.S.Champaneri for the respondents.
In the affidavit-in-reply filed by the Deputy Director, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Ahmedabad, in paragraph Nos.4 and 5(Page No.118), it has been stated that the licences of the petitioner are genuine and the certified copies of these licences are issued to the petitioner. The Paragraph Nos.4 and 5 are reproduced as under:-
"4. It is further submitted that the 08 licences purchased by the petitioner and used at Mumbai port are genuine licences which were sold to them by the licence brokers/ traders from the open market. The corresponding 08 forged licences were sold by the licence brokers/ traders, involved in the act of forgery, to M/s Hindalco Industries Ltd and which were used by them at Dahej Port. The 08 forged licences, in original, used by M/s Hindalco Industries Ltd were obtained from Customs Dahej. To establish the fact of the 08 licences having been forged, the corresponding 08 genuine DEPB-licences purchased by the petitioner were called for and obtained from them. These 08 genuine licences of the petitioner are crucial and critical evidences required for establishing the fact that the other set of 08 licences used by M/s Hindalco Industries Ltd at Dahej were forged licences. Therefore, these 08 genuine licences of the petitioner are required by the respondent as the same are evidences which are to be used in taking action under the Customs Act, 1962 against the persons involved in the forgery and sale of the licences. These 08 genuine licences are also required by the Hon'ble Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Bharuch in Criminal Case No.1765/2011.
5. In light of the facts stated hereinabove, it is humbly submitted that it was and is not possible for the respondent to part with these crucial and critical documents in a case of such huge magnitude involving action under the Customs Act, 1962 as well as under the Indian Penal Code by other law enforcement authorities. In these circumstances the petitioner was given copies certified by a gazetted officer of this office to enable them to obtain the benefits due to them from the office of the DGFT."
Once, the respondents have found that the licences of the petitioner are genuine, then, the respondents are required to hand over the licences and they cannot detain the licences. It is open for them to keep the certified copies of those licences. It is stated by the petitioner that in absence of the original licences, the petitioner will not be able to endorse the same in re-crediting of SAD to import goods, prior to 30.06.2012.
In view of the statement and the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 3, this petition is disposed of with direction that respondent Nos.2 and 3 will return back the licences to the petitioner, within a period of 2(Two) days from today and if other formalities are complied with, respondent No.4 shall process the application of the petitioner for re-credit of SAD, within 2(Two) days, thereafter.
It is clarified that if this order is not complied with, the respondents will be personally responsible for the loss, suffered to the petitioner.
Direct service, today is permitted.
[V.M.SAHAI, J.] [N.V.ANJARIA, J.] ..mitesh..
Top