2010 (7) TMI 181 - HC - Customs

Release of goods- The respondents to provisionally release the goods on execution of full value bond of the goods and on payment of 25% of the value of the goods in cash as security . It appears that the learned trial Judge while passing the impugned judgment and order has observed that in identical matters authorities had directed provisional release of the goods on execution of the full value bond of the goods and on payment of 25% of the value of the goods in cash as cash security. Held that- discretion excised by trial judge not arbitrary. Impugned order sustainable. Sample required for adjudication to be preserved before release of goods.

Summary

Issues: Provisional release of goods, discretion of the trial Judge, challenge to the judgment, preservation of sample for adjudication.

Provisional Release of Goods: The judgment involves a case where the trial Judge directed the provisional release of goods upon execution of a full value bond and payment of 25% of the goods' value in cash as security. The trial Judge based this decision on a previous case where a similar direction was followed by the authorities. The appellant challenged this decision, arguing that the writ petitioner was a habitual defaulter and suggesting the requirement of a bank guarantee instead of a bond due to incomplete adjudication proceedings. The respondent contended that the goods were not released for investigation purposes and should have been released unconditionally after the investigation was completed. The trial Judge's decision was upheld, stating that the exercise of discretion was not arbitrary based on past similar orders by the department.

Discretion of the Trial Judge: The High Court analyzed whether the trial Judge's exercise of discretion in the case was arbitrary. It was noted that the trial Judge provided reasoning for the decision based on past similar orders by the department. The Court found that the appellant did not challenge the trial Judge's finding that no similar orders were passed by the department in the past under identical circumstances. Consequently, the Court held that the trial Judge's judgment did not warrant interference, and the appeal and application were dismissed.

Challenge to the Judgment: The appellant challenged the trial Judge's decision on the provisional release of goods, arguing for a bank guarantee instead of a bond due to the writ petitioner's history as a habitual defaulter and the uncertainty regarding the nature of the imported goods. However, the Court found no merit in the challenge, as the trial Judge's decision was based on existing precedents and not deemed arbitrary.

Preservation of Sample for Adjudication: The Court directed the preservation of a sample of the goods for adjudication purposes before their release as per the trial Judge's order. Additionally, the Court kept all points open for adjudication by the appropriate officer, considering that a reply to the show-cause notice had been filed. Finally, the Court ordered the supply of an urgent certified copy of the judgment to the applicants and made no ruling on costs in the case.