2015 (12) TMI 856 - AT - Customs

Provisional release of seized goods - Assessee being aggrieved by the allegedly harsh conditions of provisional release filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that such orders are appealable as held by High Court of Delhi - Held that - In the light of the order of the High Court of Delhi 2015 (2) TMI 27 - DELHI HIGH COURT , which has not been stayed or set aside, Board s Circular dated 4-9-2013 is of no consequence. Merely because an SLP is proposed to be filed against the said orders of the High Court of Delhi does not in any way eclipse its binding force. Thus, the impugned order suffers from no appealable infirmity - provisional release not stayed.

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against provisional release order
- Appealability of provisional release orders under Customs Act, 1962
- Discrepancy between High Court judgment and C.B.E. & C. letter
- Validity of impugned order and stay application

Analysis:
1. Appeal against provisional release order: The case involved the appeal filed by the Revenue against the provisional release of seized goods imported by the respondents. The provisional release was granted subject to certain conditions, including the payment of a differential duty, execution of a bank guarantee, and submission of a solvency certificate. The importers challenged the conditions of provisional release before the Commissioner (Appeals), citing a High Court judgment that such orders are appealable.

2. Appealability of provisional release orders under Customs Act, 1962: The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the provisional release order, noting that it lacked essential details such as the declared value of goods and the nature of the offense. The order was deemed non-speaking and issued without hearing the appellant. The Commissioner directed the field officer to issue a new provisional release order within 21 days, considering relevant case laws. The Revenue appealed this decision, arguing that the High Court judgment conflicted with a Customs Board circular stating that orders under Section 110A of the Customs Act are not appealable.

3. Discrepancy between High Court judgment and C.B.E. & C. letter: The High Court of Delhi, in W.P. No. 1670/2014, held that provisional release orders are appealable as they are made under specific statutory provisions and not merely administrative decisions. The Court emphasized the significance of the conditions imposed in such orders. The Tribunal noted that the Board's circular was not applicable in light of the High Court's unchallenged judgment, rendering the impugned order non-appealable.

4. Validity of impugned order and stay application: Considering the binding nature of the High Court judgment and the lack of a stay or reversal, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal. It held that the impugned order had no appealable defects and upheld the Commissioner's decision to set aside the initial provisional release order. The stay application filed by the Revenue was also dismissed as infructuous in light of the dismissal of the appeal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal affirmed the appealability of provisional release orders based on the High Court judgment and emphasized the necessity of speaking orders with essential details. The conflicting interpretations between the High Court decision and the Customs Board circular were resolved in favor of the former, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal and stay application.