9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Classification of imported goods under customs tariff item. 2. Seizure and recovery of goods by customs officials. 3. Request for release of goods and clearance process. 4. Show cause notice for violations and proposed confiscation. 5. Authority to release goods and conditions imposed. Classification of Imported Goods: The petitioner imported MS wires of electrode quality copper coated, classified under customs tariff item No. 7217.9092. Customs authorities assessed the goods and cleared them with 5% duty. Dispute arose when officials seized goods for misclassification due to silicon content exceeding 0.6% in certain samples. Petitioner contended that goods were previously cleared by authorities after examination, requesting release based on past practices. Seizure and Recovery of Goods: Customs officials visited the petitioner's premises, detained duty paid goods, and seized items worth Rs. 36 lakhs for differential customs duty. Petitioner requested release of goods through correspondence, citing previous clearance by authorities. Officials also imposed a past liability payment of Rs. 6.25 lakhs, leading to the petitioner filing writ petitions seeking relief. Request for Release of Goods: Despite petitioner's efforts to clear goods and requests to authorities, no resolution was reached. Petitioner approached various authorities for clearance, offering to safeguard departmental interests by providing necessary security. The matter escalated when a show cause notice was issued, proposing confiscation of goods for misdeclaration and imposition of fines. Show Cause Notice and Proposed Confiscation: A show cause notice was issued, highlighting violations in clearing goods and proposing confiscation along with fines for misdeclaration. Court observed that goods were not contraband, indicating that confiscation may not be necessary. Court emphasized the possibility of imposing a redemption fine in lieu of confiscation to release goods while protecting both departmental and petitioner's interests. Authority to Release Goods: The court directed the Assistant Director and Senior Intelligence Officer to release the goods upon payment of differential duty and compliance with the show cause notice. The petitioner was instructed to furnish a personal bond and allow further chemical examination of seized goods if required. Additionally, a sum of Rs. 6,25,000 was to be credited to the petitioner's ledger account, and release of goods was subject to fulfilling these conditions. In conclusion, the writ petitions were disposed of with the specified directions, and no costs were awarded.
|
