IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 7TH AUGUST 2009 / 16TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 19928 of 2009(I) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- SWADESHI IMPORTS & EXPORTS, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REGISTERED UNDER THE INDIAN PARTNERSHIP ACT,1932,HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 443, CHERUVANNOOR P.O.,FEROKE,CALICUT,KERALA-673 631, REP.BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER K.V.ZAKEER HUSSAIN. BY ADV. MR.ASWIN GOPAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA,REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY (REVENUE),MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (REFUND),CUSTOM HOUSE,WILLINGDON ISLAND, COCHIN-682 009. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL,SC,CB EX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 19928 of 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 7th August,2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by the alleged delay on the part of the respondents in effecting refund of the excess redemption fine and penalty that came to be paid by the petitioner, pursuant to an order passed by the original authority. 2. Petitioner had imported polished marble slabs of 2cm thickness of various varieties. Respondents raised a dispute regarding the classification of the item. Proceedings were taken under Section 111 of the Customs Act and after a personal hearing by Ext.P1 order the Joint Commissioner of Customs found that the goods are liable to be confiscated and permitted redemption of the same on payment of fine of Rs.18 lakhs and penalty of Rs.2 lakhs. An appeal filed by the petitioner against the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) was allowed in part and there was reduction of the fine amount as also the penalty. Pursuant to Ext.P2, an application for refund was filed by the W.P ( C) No. 19928 of 2009 2 petitioner as per Ext.P3 along with the originals of the documents as prescribed by the Customs Refund Application (Form) Regulations 1995. 3. The Department challenged Ext.P2 in an appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal which also came to be dismissed as per Ext.P4 order dated 29.6.2009. Writ petition was filed alleging delay in the process of the refund application in spite of the order of the appellate authority having been affirmed by the CESTAT. On instructions, learned counsel for the Department submits that the order passed by the Tribunal has been presently accepted by the department and the amount due by way of refund shall be disbursed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment . This shall be done. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly. (V.GIRI,JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 19928 of 2009 3 W.P ( C) No. 19928 of 2009 4