2012 (3) TMI 112 - HC - Customs

Undervaluation of goods - Provisional Release of the goods - learned counsel had further prayed that on the petitioner furnishing the bond and on making the payment, as stated above, the third respondent may be directed to release the goods in question, forthwith - Decided in favor of the assessee by way of direction to deposit Rs. 3,00,000, as part of differential duty

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Detention of imported goods for alleged undervaluation
2. Provisional release of goods under Section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962
3. Conditions for provisional release and compliance by the petitioner

Detention of Imported Goods for Alleged Undervaluation:
The petitioner had imported cosmetic goods and claimed clearance for home consumption. However, the respondents detained the goods, alleging undervaluation. The petitioner appeared before the Enquiry Officer, submitted necessary documents, and paid duty amount. Despite this, the goods were not released. Subsequently, a communication was issued allowing provisional release subject to conditions, including submission of a suitable bond and a bank guarantee. The petitioner agreed to furnish a bond for a higher value and deposit a sum towards the differential duty. The court directed the petitioner to fulfill these conditions for the release of the goods within ten days.

Provisional Release of Goods under Section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962:
The Additional Commissioner of Customs allowed provisional release of the goods under Section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962, subject to the petitioner fulfilling specified conditions. These conditions included submitting a suitable bond for the provisional value of the goods and a bank guarantee. The petitioner expressed willingness to comply with the conditions by furnishing a higher bond amount and making a partial payment towards the differential duty. The court ordered the petitioner to furnish the bond and deposit the specified amount to secure the release of the goods.

Conditions for Provisional Release and Compliance by the Petitioner:
The court directed the petitioner to furnish a bond for a specified amount and deposit a sum towards the differential duty as required by the third respondent. Upon compliance with these conditions, the respondents were instructed to release the goods within ten days. The petitioner assured full cooperation in the adjudication proceedings to be initiated by the respondents. The writ petition was granted in favor of the petitioner, with no costs imposed, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed as a result of the judgment.