2021 (10) TMI 323 - HC - Customs

Seeking provisional release of imported goods - pendency of the review petition - HELD THAT - This writ petition is disposed of by directing the Principal Commissioner of Customs (Port) to consider afresh representation of the petitioner dated 13th April, 2021 for provisional release of goods in question in accordance with law and by passing a reasoned and speaking order and considering for imposition of softer condition for provisional release in view of the fact that petitioner's money amounting to more than ₹ 98 lacks has already been deposited with them and further that the respondents themselves are not able to pass the final order of adjudication in spite of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court held in their favour in the case of M/S CANON INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS 2021 (3) TMI 384 - SUPREME COURT on the ground of pendency of the review petition and for which petitioner should not have been penalized. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to inaction on passing final order of adjudication, Inaction on considering representation for provisional release of imported goods, Harsh conditions for provisional release, Non-speaking impugned order, Compliance with Board's instruction, Disposal of writ petition.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the inaction of the customs authority in passing the final order of adjudication and not considering the representation for provisional release of the imported goods. The advocate for the customs authority referred to the Board's instruction of March 17, 2021, stating that the adjudicating authority was refraining from passing the final order due to this directive. On the other hand, the petitioner's counsel highlighted that despite a communication from Customs agreeing to provisional release, the conditions imposed were deemed harsh and unreasonable, requiring an additional cash deposit despite a substantial amount already being deposited. The impugned order of September 3, 2021 was criticized for lacking reasoning and not addressing the petitioner's concerns raised in the representation dated April 13, 2021.

The High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the Principal Commissioner of Customs (Port) to reconsider the petitioner's representation for provisional release of the goods. The court emphasized the need for a reasoned and speaking order, urging for softer conditions considering the significant sum already deposited by the petitioner. It was noted that the customs authorities themselves were unable to finalize the adjudication order despite a favorable Supreme Court judgment in another case, citing a pending review petition as a reason. The Principal Commissioner was instructed to review the representation within four weeks, granting the petitioner or their authorized representative an opportunity to be heard and taking into account the observations made in the court's order.

In conclusion, the writ petition was disposed of with a directive for the customs authority to reevaluate the petitioner's representation for provisional release, ensuring compliance with the law and imposing fair conditions, given the circumstances and the substantial deposit already made by the petitioner. The court emphasized the importance of a reasoned order and granted a specific timeline for the disposal of the representation, aiming to address the concerns raised by the petitioner effectively.