2002(02)LCX0129

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Shivaraj V. Patil and Bisheshwar Prasad Singh, JJ.

UNION OF INDIA

Versus

SUN EXPORT CORPORATION

Civil Appeal Nos. 2676-2679 of 1991, decided on 28-2-2002

CASE CITED

Sav Udyog Viniyog Ltd. v. U.O.I. — 2001(08)LCX0090 Eq 2001 (133) ELT 0261 (S.C.) — Followed.................... [Para 1]

Advocated By :   S/Shri M. L. Verma, Sr. Advocate, K.C. Kaushik and G.V. Rao for B.K. Prasad, Advocates, for the Appellant.

Shri Ramesh Singh, Ms. Vanita Bhargava and Ms. Divya Roy, Advocates for Ms. Bina Gupta and Ms. Indu Malhotra, Advocates, for the Respondent.

[Order]. - The learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that in view of the order passed in Civil Appeal No. 5658 of 1994 upholding the decision of the Bombay High Court involving the import of In-shell Almonds where the customs authorities have imposed redemption fine and penalty, these appeals are to be allowed. However, the learned Counsel for the respondents submitted that appeals filed by the appellants before the Collector (Appeals) were themselves not maintainable and the learned Single Judge of the High Court had accepted that contention. In the appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court, this question was not considered. However, the appeals filed by the appellants were dismissed accepting the view that In-shell Almonds were not “dry fruits” but only “seeds”. The learned Counsel for the respondents further submitted that in this situation, there was no need for the respondents to challenge the said order passed by the Division Bench and urged that the matter be remitted to the Division Bench of the High Court for considering the question of maintainability of the appeals before the Collector (Appeals).

2. In these circumstances, holding that In-shell Almonds are not seeds for germination or plantation, in view of the order passed in Civil Appeal No. 5658 of 1994 these appeals are allowed, the impugned orders are set aside and the cases are remitted to the Division Bench of the High Court to consider only the question as to the maintainability of the appeals filed before the Collector (Appeals) and to pass appropriate orders. No costs.

Equivalent 2002 (144) ELT 499 (S.C.)