2018 (4) TMI 1117 - HC - Customs

Provisional release of goods - Section 110A of the Customs Act - petitioner claim that are these not prohibited and also no issues including issues pertaining to intellectual property rights pertains - Held that - the conditions imposed in the impugned order can be slightly modified - This is so because the goods, which are permitted for provisional release, have already been scrutinized by the Department and it appears that the except for the prohibited goods and except for the goods where there are violations with regard to intellectual property rights, the Department is willing to release the same. The power under Section 110A of the said Act is to make a delicate balance between the importer of the goods and the Revenue. Taking into consideration the fact that the Bill of Entry was filed in June 2017 and that the respondent himself is willing to provisionally release the goods, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by modifying the conditions imposed in the impugned order. Petition allowed in part.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to order for provisional release of goods under Section 110A of the Customs Act.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged an order by the respondent regarding the provisional release of goods imported under a specific Bill of Entry. Previously, the petitioner had approached the Court for provisional release, which was partially granted with specific conditions. The respondent later imposed three conditions for release, including a personal bond, bank guarantee, and payment of differential duty. The petitioner argued that the conditions were onerous considering the value of the consignment. The Department defended the conditions as reasonable due to some goods being prohibited. However, the calculation of the bank guarantee amount was not clearly explained initially.

Upon further review, the Court found that the conditions could be slightly modified. Section 110A of the Customs Act allows for provisional release pending adjudication, balancing the interests of the importer and the Revenue. The Court noted that the original conditions were burdensome and decided to modify them to protect the Revenue's interests adequately while ensuring fairness to the importer.

Regarding a specific case mentioned in the judgment, the Court observed that the petitioner had an alternate remedy through appeal, which was pursued but had not reached finality. Considering the time elapsed since the filing of the Bill of Entry and the willingness of the respondent to provisionally release the goods, the Court decided to partially allow the writ petition by modifying the conditions imposed in the original order.

The Court directed the petitioner to comply with revised conditions, including payment of applicable differential duty, execution of a personal bond, and waiver of demurrage and detention charges. The goods were to be released provisionally upon meeting these conditions within a specified timeframe. The judgment concluded by stating that no costs were awarded, and related proceedings were closed.