Page 235 - ELT_15th July 2020_Vol 373_Part 2

2020 ] HINDUSTAN TIN WORKS LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA 217

preserve it till disposal of the case is also arbitrary. This is more so evident be-
cause the authority was fully conscious of the fact that the goods so seized were
of highly perishable nature and that the petitioner could not satisfy such condi-
tion.
27. Thus, the entire proceedings against the petitioner having been
conducted in gross violation of the statutory provisions of the Act stands vitiat-
ed, more so because the petitioner has been subjected not only to irreparable loss
and injury but has also been denied the basic principle of audi alteram partem,
leading to much harassment and injury by the illegal acts of the respondents.
28. In the result and for the reasons stated above, the impugned order
dated 23-9-2012, as contained in Annexure-4, and the impugned order dated 22-
11-2013, as contained in Annexure-1 to the interlocutory application, are held to
be bad in law and are thus set aside.
29. This Court, considering the facts that the whole proceedings against
the petitioner stands vitiated as being without jurisdiction, also allows the prayer
of the petitioner for refund of Rs. 1,21,620/-, being the price of 2027 pieces of
Goat Skins, which has been illegally sold by the respondent-authorities.
30. The writ application is, thus, allowed. However, in the facts and cir-
cumstances, there shall be no order as to costs.

_______

2020 (373) E.L.T. 217 (Del.)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
S. Ravindra Bhat and A.K. Chawla, JJ.
HINDUSTAN TIN WORKS LTD.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA
W.P. (C) No. 10526 of 2017, decided on 8-10-2018
Refund of Terminal Excise Duty (TED) - Deemed export - Supplies to
EOUs made before 15-3-2013 without International Competitive Bidding - Re-
fund of duty claimed in terms of clause 8.3(c) of Foreign Trade Policy, 2009-13
as it stood prior to 15-3-2013 - Subsequent amendment to existing regime
which exempted payment of TED altogether cannot be reason for denying re-
fund of payment already made - Respondents directed to entertain the peti-
tioner’s refund applications returned to it; the refund applications shall be
processed within eight weeks and interest shall be payable for the past three
years @ 9% per annum - Para 8.5 Foreign Trade Policy, 2009-13. [paras 8, 9]
Petition allowed
CASE CITED
Kandoi Metal Powders Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India — 2014 (302) E.L.T. 209 (Del.)
— Relied on .................................................................................................................................. [Paras 3, 7]
DEPARTMENTAL CLARIFICATION CITED
D.G.F.T. Circular No. 16, dated 15-3-2013 ....................................................................................... [Paras 2, 5]

EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th July 2020  235