2007 (9) TMI 79 - HC - Customs

Seizure of Indian currency on account of sale proceeds of smuggled goods No evidence of smuggling so impugned sale proceeds are of legally imported goods Revenue was directed to release the currency Not mandatory for importer to maintain some minimum balance in bank account

Summary

Issues:
1. Release of imported goods pending adjudication and release of seized Indian currency.
2. Dispute over the value and thickness of the imported goods.

Analysis:
Issue 1: The petitioner sought the release of goods imported under a bill of entry and the seized Indian currency. The petitioner claimed to be a regular importer of PU coated fabric and faced actions from the respondents upon importing goods at a specific rate. The respondents had seized cash and issued orders regarding maintaining a minimum balance in the petitioner's bank accounts. The court allowed the release of the imported fabric at a specific value pending adjudication, based on the thickness and value provided by the petitioner, emphasizing the lack of conclusive determination by the respondents regarding the goods' characteristics.

Issue 2: The controversy revolved around the thickness and value of the imported goods. The petitioner argued for a lower value based on previous imports and customs circulars. The court noted the delay in determining the goods' characteristics by the respondents and relied on the petitioner's information regarding the thickness. It concluded that the goods should be valued at a lower rate per meter, directing the release of the goods at the specified value. The court also addressed the seizure of Indian currency, rejecting the respondents' claim that it represented sale proceeds from smuggled goods, emphasizing the lack of evidence to classify the goods as smuggled and highlighting the petitioner's ownership claim over the currency. The court allowed the release of the seized currency and relieved the petitioner from the bank balance requirement, pending further proceedings.

Additional: The court referenced legal precedents to support its decision, highlighting the petitioner's entitlement to the relief sought. It outlined conditions for restitution in case of adverse adjudication outcomes and warned against non-compliance. The judgment addressed a related writ petition with similar prayers, disposing of it in alignment with the decisions made in the interim application.