2023 (7) TMI 1358 - HC - Customs

Seizure of imported Gold Dore bars - notification of 13 August 2008 which dealt with the import of Gold Dore bars and other articles from least developed countries - HELD THAT - It is not the case of the petitioner that it had, at any time, approached the respondents to seek amendment of the conditions which stood added to the import permission. In view of the aforesaid, it would be impermissible for the petitioner to now contend that the notifications of 2012 and 2017 would not be applicable. In view of the aforesaid, the submission of the petitioner being entitled to import Gold Dore bars solely on the basis of the notification of 2008 cannot be sustained. The record bears out that the petitioner has additionally and upon payment of the entire customs duty under protest also moved an appropriate application to the second respondent for provisional release of the goods. In view of the fact that the duty element and liability has been duly taken care of, it is left open to the petitioner to pursue that application and only observe that any application for provisional release which may be pending consideration before the second respondent shall be taken up for consideration and disposed of expeditiously and preferably within a period of three weeks from today. All contentions of respective parties, on merits, otherwise are kept open. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
The validity of the seizure memo dated 26 December 2022 regarding the import of "Gold Dore" bars.

Summary:
The petitioner applied for import permission before the Exim Facilitation Committee, which granted permission for the import of 5 MT of Gold Dore bars subject to specific conditions. The petitioner was required to comply with Custom Notification No.12/2012 and RBI notifications.

The imported Gold Dore bars were seized by the respondents for not meeting weight specifications and exceeding the maximum purity limit of 95%. The seizure was based on the conditions set out in the notification of 17 March 2012.

The petitioner argued that a 2008 exemption notification for imports from "least developed countries" applied, as it had not been rescinded or superseded by later notifications. However, the Court held that the petitioner was bound by the conditions of the 2012 and 2017 notifications, which superseded the 2008 notification.

The Court found that the petitioner failed to seek an amendment to the import permission conditions and was therefore obligated to comply with the 2017 notification regarding weight and purity requirements for Gold Dore bars.

The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) extended the period of seizure under the Customs Act, 1962, and was finalizing a show cause notice. The petitioner was advised to address all contentions before the DRI and had the right to challenge the findings on weight and purity.

The petitioner had paid the customs duty under protest and applied for provisional release of the goods, which was pending consideration. The Court directed the second respondent to expedite the consideration of the application within three weeks.

In conclusion, the petition and pending application were disposed of based on the above terms, with all contentions of the parties kept open for further consideration.