9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Challenge to communication for provisional release of imported goods, applicability of Customs Act provisions, availability of alternative remedy under section 128 of the Customs Act.
Challenge to communication for provisional release of imported goods: The petitioner challenged a communication stipulating conditions for the provisional release of goods imported by them, contending that the conditions were harsh and contrary to previous court dicta and CBEC instructions. The petitioner argued for the application of principles from previous judgments and Customs Regulation 2011 for release of goods pending adjudication, highlighting a lacuna in the Customs Act regarding the need for a pending adjudication or show cause notice. Applicability of Customs Act provisions: The respondent opposed the relief sought by the petitioner, suggesting that the petitioner should pursue an appeal to the Commissioner Customs (Appeals) under section 128 of the Customs Act. The respondent maintained that the goods in question were mis-declared and could only be released based on the conditions specified in the impugned communication. Availability of alternative remedy under section 128 of the Customs Act: The court directed the petitioner to pursue an appeal to the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) for adjudication, balancing the petitioner's interest with the need for an alternate remedy. The Commissioner was instructed to treat the writ petition as an appeal and decide on the release of goods within two weeks. The respondent acknowledged a previous representation by the petitioner but agreed that it should not hinder the fresh adjudication process. This judgment addressed the challenge to conditions for provisional release of imported goods, clarified the applicability of Customs Act provisions, and directed the petitioner to seek an alternative remedy under section 128 of the Customs Act through an appeal to the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) for timely adjudication.
|
