2016 (8) TMI 529 - HC - Customs

Requirement of Sanitary Import Permit (SIP) import of frozen fish detention of consignment for testing purposes Held that - the question of interpretation and applicability of the notifications of requirement of Sanitary Import Permit being there or not in the present case, has become academic and need not be decided by this Court at this stage. Tests were carried out and certified that the consignment under question is free from pathogens with respect to the general microbiological parameters regarding the frozen fish. Direction to the respondents to release the consignment in-question of the imported frozen fish of the petitioner immediately, subject to payment of the incidental expenses of the laboratory tests carried out by the respondents immediate release granted payment of laboratory charges by appellant appeal disposed off decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues: Interpretation of Sanitary Import Permit requirement for imported frozen fish.

In this case, the petitioner imported frozen fish from Oman, which was detained as it lacked the necessary Sanitary Import Permit (SIP). The petitioner argued that the requirement of SIP did not apply to fish based on relevant notifications. The court, after considering the submissions, found that the impugned order directing deportation or destruction of the consignment was quasi-judicial in nature and passed without giving the petitioner an opportunity to be heard. The court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, stayed the operation of the order and directed testing of the samples. The court allowed the release of the consignment subject to lab tests and issuance of a health certificate by the Quarantine Officer. The court also directed that if no adverse elements were found, the consignment could be cleared upon payment of customs duty. The court further directed that if adverse medical reports were issued, appropriate orders should be passed by the Deputy Commissioner. The case was listed for further proceedings on specific dates for completion of testing and submission of reports.

The respondent conducted tests on the samples and found the fish to be free from diseases. The court was informed that the consignment could be released, but the respondent requested reimbursement of testing expenses. The court noted the certifications from different laboratories and directed the immediate release of the consignment to the petitioner, subject to payment of the testing expenses. The court disposed of the writ petition, leaving the academic question of SIP interpretation open, and directed the respondents to release the consignment upon payment of incidental expenses, without delaying the immediate release. No costs of litigation were awarded in the judgment.