2012 (2) TMI 39 - HC - Customs

Plea for release of confiscated goods import of Oats goods confiscated due to the objections raised by the Port Health Officer and that goods have been misbranded - CESTAT vide order dated 27.10.11 directed for release of goods on fulfillment of certain conditions by assessee release pending - Held that - Since Revenue has not challenged the order of CESTAT hence with the conditions attached in the order, it is directed to implement the order of CESTAT within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Petitioner would have to comply with a number of conditions like providing details to comply with the local laws, at the time of the re-packing and the re-labeling of the said goods, in the customs bonded area, and goods to be subjected to necessary tests to make sure that the goods in question are fit for human consumption, before release of goods Decided in favor of petitioner.

Issues:
1. Implementation of final order of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal for releasing goods.
2. Confiscation of goods under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962.
3. Appeal process and reduction of fine and penalty.
4. Compliance with labeling requirements and local laws.
5. Authority to detain goods after Tribunal's order.
6. Release of goods and conditions imposed by authorities.
7. Fit for human consumption and health hazards.
8. Directives for releasing goods as per Tribunal's order.

Issue 1: Implementation of Tribunal's Order for Releasing Goods
The petitioner, a partnership firm involved in importing cereals, specifically white oats, filed a writ petition seeking the release of goods in question as per the final order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal directed the customs authorities to allow the re-packing and re-labeling of the goods in a customs bonded area before clearance, subject to necessary inspections by Port Health Authorities.

Issue 2: Confiscation of Goods under Customs Act
The goods imported by the petitioner were confiscated by the second respondent under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962, due to objections raised by the Port Health Officer regarding missing information on the packs. The petitioner challenged this confiscation through appeals, resulting in the reduction of fine and penalty amounts by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals).

Issue 3: Appeal Process and Reduction of Fine
After the Commissioner's decision, the petitioner appealed to the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, which set aside the impugned order and directed the authorities to allow re-packing and re-labeling of the goods as per the petitioner's undertaking to comply with local laws. The Tribunal emphasized the need for necessary tests by Port Health Authorities before customs clearance.

Issue 4: Compliance with Labeling Requirements
The petitioner argued that the goods did not violate labeling requirements as they were to be further processed into smaller retail packs where labeling was not mandatory. The petitioner undertook to provide necessary details for compliance with local laws during re-packing and re-labeling in the Customs Bonded Area.

Issue 5: Authority to Detain Goods
The respondents claimed authority to detain the goods even after the Tribunal's order, citing pending appeals against the Tribunal's decision. However, the petitioner contended that as long as no appeal had been filed against the Tribunal's order, the respondents had no authority to detain the goods.

Issue 6: Release of Goods and Imposed Conditions
The Court directed the respondents to release the goods in question within two weeks, following the conditions specified in the Tribunal's order. The release was subject to compliance with necessary details for local laws, re-packing, re-labeling in a customs bonded area, and inspection by Port Health Authorities to ensure the goods are fit for human consumption.

Issue 7: Fit for Human Consumption and Health Hazards
Concerns were raised regarding the fitness of the goods for human consumption, with the respondents arguing against releasing them due to potential health hazards. The petitioner assured compliance with all conditions to ensure the goods were suitable for consumption.

Issue 8: Directives for Releasing Goods
The Court directed the respondents to implement the Tribunal's order, emphasizing the need for compliance with labeling requirements, local laws, and necessary inspections before releasing the goods. The respondents were instructed to release the goods within two weeks, ensuring they were fit for human consumption.

The judgment addresses various issues related to the import and release of goods, highlighting the importance of compliance with labeling requirements, local laws, and health standards. It underscores the need for authorities to follow the directives of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal and ensure that goods are fit for human consumption before release.

← Previous Next →