2021 (2) TMI 312 - HC - Customs

Provisional release of attached goods - export of cut and polished diamonds - Circular No.30/2013-Customs, dated 05.08.2013 and Circular No.1/11-Customs, dated 04.01.2011 - HELD THAT - There are no impediment to exercise of power by the Commissioner of Customs under section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962. The Commissioner of Customs directed to pass order(s) for provisional release of the exportable goods of the petitioners in accordance with law within seven days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - Stand over to 01.02.2021.

Summary

Issues:
Seizure of cut and polished diamonds for export under different shipping bills; Justification of seizure by respondents; Interpretation of Circular No.30/2013-Customs and Circular No.1/11-Customs; Application of section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962 for provisional release of seized goods.

Analysis:
The High Court of BOMBAY HIGH COURT heard arguments from both parties regarding the seizure memos dated 31.10.2020 and 02.11.2020 concerning the declared quantities of cut and polished diamonds intended for export under various shipping bills. The respondents provided an affidavit justifying the seizure, while the petitioners referenced Circular No.30/2013-Customs and Circular No.1/11-Customs from the Central Board Excise and Customs, New Delhi. The Court refrained from delving into the conflicting contentions at this stage and decided to invoke section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962 to ensure justice is served. Section 110A allows for the provisional release of seized goods pending adjudication upon the owner providing a bond with specified security and conditions. This provision was previously analyzed in the case of Siddharth Vijay Shah Vs. Union of India, emphasizing the balance between the owner's right to seek provisional release and the discretionary power of the adjudicating authority. The Court clarified that there is no restriction on the release of goods classified as prohibited under section 2(33) under section 110A, highlighting the general nature of the terms "goods, documents, and things seized." The Court found no hindrance to the Commissioner of Customs exercising power under section 110A and directed the Commissioner to issue orders for the provisional release of the petitioners' exportable goods within seven days from the date of the order.

This judgment addresses the issues surrounding the seizure of goods for export, the justifications provided by the respondents, the interpretation of relevant customs circulars, and the application of section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962 for the provisional release of seized goods. The Court's decision to invoke section 110A reflects a commitment to upholding justice while balancing the interests of both the owners and the revenue authorities. The analysis of the provision in Siddharth Vijay Shah Vs. Union of India provided clarity on the scope and application of section 110A, emphasizing the need to understand and implement the provision in a pragmatic manner. By directing the Commissioner of Customs to act within a specified timeframe, the Court ensures timely resolution of the matter and underscores the importance of following legal procedures in such cases. This judgment sets a precedent for similar cases involving the seizure and release of goods under customs laws, emphasizing the need for a fair and balanced approach in adjudicating such matters.