2011 (4) TMI 52 - HC - Customs

Release of detained goods - A Division Bench in its order dated 21.10.2009 made in W.A.No.1508 of 2009 (THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORTS) SEAPORT CHENNAI AND ANOTHER Vs. M/S.POLYCRAFT EXPORTS (P) LTD. AND ANOTHER).orders have been passed in several writ petitions directing the release of the detained goods without any modification of the conditions impugned in the earlier order - Writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to deposit 25% of the enhanced value apart from paying the applicable rate of duty on the enhanced value - After complying the condition the respondents are directed to release the goods in question forthwith with liberty to the respondents to proceed further with the adjudication proceedings in accordance with law. The petitioner shall co-operate fully in the adjudication proceedings to be conducted by the respondents

Summary

Issues: Release of detained goods, conditions for release, adjudication proceedings

Release of Detained Goods:
The High Court of Madras, after hearing both parties, addressed the issue of releasing Second Hand Digital Multifunction Print and Copying Machines detained during investigations. The respondents requested the release of goods upon depositing 40% of the enhanced value and paying the applicable duty, with an assurance of completing adjudication proceedings within 15 days. The Court, considering past orders and lack of new grounds for modification, directed the release of goods with similar conditions imposed in previous cases.

Conditions for Release:
The Court noted that its previous conditions for releasing goods had been upheld by a Division Bench in a related case. The current judgment required the petitioner to deposit 25% of the enhanced value and pay the applicable duty for the release of goods. The respondents were instructed to release the goods promptly, with the liberty to continue adjudication proceedings as per the law. The petitioner was mandated to cooperate fully in the adjudication process.

Adjudication Proceedings:
The judgment emphasized the importance of cooperation from the petitioner in the upcoming adjudication proceedings conducted by the respondents. The Court's decision aimed at balancing the release of goods with the continuation of legal processes, ensuring compliance with the law. The writ petition was disposed of, and a related Miscellaneous Petition was closed, with no costs imposed.