2020 (11) TMI 198 - HC - Customs

Provisional release of goods - Section 110-A of Customs Act - Seizure of gold bars - direction to Respondents to supply copies of mobile forensic data, all documents and relevant CCTV footage of 13.12.2019 of the Customs arrival hall from 7.45 am to 15.15 hours - HELD THAT - Having regard to the fact that the Order-in-Original dated 7th October, 2020 has already been passed by the adjudicating authority in respect of the show cause notice dated 29th January, 2020, it would be just and proper if the Petitioner seeks her redress before the appellate forum. Consequently, we are not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition as the Petitioner has efficacious alternate remedy under the provisions of Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962. We express no opinion on merit and all contentions are left open. Petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Petitioner seeking writ of mandamus for seizure of gold bars, release of goods, and other reliefs under Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis:
1. The Petitioner, a Chinese passport holder, landed in Mumbai due to bad weather while traveling to Delhi, where she was intercepted with 10 gold bars by a customs officer. The gold was seized, and legal proceedings initiated under the Customs Act, 1962.

2. The Petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking various reliefs, including the release of gold bars for export, provisional release under Section 110A, and supply of relevant documents and CCTV footage. The Respondents replied, denying the documents and CCTV footage requested by the Petitioner.

3. The Respondents contended that the Petitioner intentionally evaded declaring the gold bars to avoid customs duty, and the adjudication proceedings were concluded with an Order-in-Original dated 7th October, 2020. The Respondents highlighted the circumstances of interception and seizure of the gold bars.

4. The Petitioner's defense included reasons for visiting India, plans for the gold in Hong Kong, and lack of knowledge about the gold's origin. The Petitioner was arrested, granted bail, and the trial commenced in the C.M.M. Court.

5. The Court dismissed the writ petition, stating the Petitioner has an alternate remedy of appeal under Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962, against the Order-in-Original. The Court did not delve into the merits of the case, leaving all contentions open, and no costs were awarded.

This judgment clarifies the legal recourse available to the Petitioner under the Customs Act, 1962, and emphasizes the importance of utilizing the statutory appeal process for redressal. The detailed analysis of the circumstances surrounding the seizure of gold bars and the subsequent legal proceedings provides a comprehensive understanding of the case.