2011 (1) TMI 309 - HC - Customs

Direction to release the goods - The issues involved in this writ petition is covered by the order of this Court, wherein, this Court had directed the respondent therein to release the goods concerned subject to certain conditions (i)The petitioner shall pay the entire amount of duty, as per the declared value, which may be based on the contract or price etc.(ii)the petitioner shall provide sufficient bank guarantee in respect of 50% of the difference in duty, in favour of the Department,(iii)the remaining 50% of the difference in duty, the petitioner shall furnish personal bond to the satisfaction of the respondent.

Summary

Issues:
Release of goods subject to conditions based on previous court order.

The judgment by the Madras High Court, delivered by Mr. Justice M. Jaichandren, pertains to a writ petition where the issues were found to be covered by a previous court order dated 29.12.2010 in W.P.Nos.30153 and 30154 of 2010. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issues in the current writ petition were similar to those in the earlier order, where the court had directed the respondent to release the goods subject to specific conditions. The Senior Central Government Standing Counsel representing the respondent had no objections to the court following its previous order. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of with directions to release the goods concerned subject to certain conditions outlined in the judgment.

The conditions set forth for the release of the goods were as follows: Firstly, the petitioner was directed to pay the entire amount of duty, as per the declared value, immediately to the Department in accordance with the provisions of the Customs Act. Secondly, the petitioner was required to provide a sufficient bank guarantee, drawn on any Nationalised bank, for 50% of the difference in duty in favor of the Department. This bank guarantee was to be maintained until the adjudication process was completed. Thirdly, for the remaining 50% of the difference in duty, the petitioner was instructed to furnish a personal bond to the satisfaction of the respondent. Upon fulfilling all three conditions, the respondent was mandated to release the goods in question.

Furthermore, upon the release of the goods and compliance with the specified conditions, the respondent was directed to complete the adjudication process within four weeks by issuing a necessary show cause notice. It was explicitly stated that upon receiving the show cause notice, the petitioner was obligated to submit objections, attend before the respondent, and cooperate with the Department throughout the adjudication process. The judgment also mentioned the closure of a connected M.P.No.1 of 2011 without any costs being imposed.