1 CP475.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLTE CIVIL JURISDICTION CONTEJPT PETITION NO.475 OF 2010 Zohar Taherali Dalal ......Petitioner Vs. The Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) And another ...... Respondents Ms. Shilpa Balani i/by Anil Balani for the Petitioner. CORAM : A.S. OKA, J. DATE : 16TH DECEMBER, 2010. P.C. 1. The breach alleged is for following direction issued by the Division Bench of this Court: "The Petitioner/Revenue is also directed to refund the amount of Rs.40,000 US dollars along with interest @ 9% from the date of confiscation till its refund to the Respondent No.1, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order." On the basis of the order of the Division Bench, refund order was passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) which reads thus: 2 CP475.10.sxw "ORDER I, therefore, order to refund Rs. 13,30,000/- (Rupees Thirteen Lakhs Thirty Thousand only) along with interest @ 9% amounting to Rs. 16,26,936/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs Twenty Six Thousand Nine Hundred Thirty Six only) and Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) as a cost of petition to Shri Zohar Taherali Dalal." 2. The first breach alleged is that instead of refunding the amount in US currency, the refund has been issued in Indian currency. The second submission is that if the currency exchange rate on the relevant date is considered, the amount of refund is on the lower side. 3. The refund order passed by the Assistant Commissioner shows that substantial compliance has been made with the order passed by the Division Bench. In view of the substantial compliance, no action can be initiated under the Contempt of Courts Act 1971. If the case of the petitioner is that the order of the Division Bench is not fully complied with, it will be open for the petitioner to adopt appropriate proceedings in accordance with law in that behalf. 4. Subject to what is observed, the contempt petition is disposed of. JUDGE