2014 (1) TMI 637 - AT - Customs

Confiscation of goods - Import of oil - Mis declaration of goods - Held that - principles laid down by the Customs (Provisional Duty Assessment) Regulations 1963 would be binding for provisional release of the goods in the absence of any method for safeguarding the interest of Revenue - Revenue directed to provisionally release the goods subject to deposit of 20% differential duty as sought to be assessed by the department and subject to execution of bond of the full proposed value of the consignment - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
- Provisional release of goods under harsh conditions
- Applicability of Customs (Provisional Duty Assessment) Regulations, 1963
- Dispute regarding the identity of goods after provisional release

Provisional Release of Goods under Harsh Conditions:
The case involved the import of oil declared as pressed distilled oil but identified as base oil upon testing. The Revenue seized the consignment, and the appellants sought provisional release during the dispute. The Commissioner allowed provisional release subject to stringent conditions, including provisional assessment at a specific value, execution of a bond, payment of differential duty, bank guarantee, and a prohibition on challenging the goods' identity. The appellants contested these conditions, citing a Delhi High Court case for leniency.

Applicability of Customs (Provisional Duty Assessment) Regulations, 1963:
The Tribunal considered the Delhi High Court's ruling emphasizing adherence to the Customs (Provisional Duty Assessment) Regulations, 1963 for provisional release in the absence of Revenue interest safeguards. The Court directed provisional clearance upon depositing 20% of the differential duty and executing a bond. The Court also highlighted the prohibition on disputing goods' identity post-provisional release as reasonable.

Dispute Regarding the Identity of Goods After Provisional Release:
Following the Delhi High Court's precedent, the Tribunal directed Revenue to provisionally release the goods upon depositing the differential duty and executing a bond. The condition preventing the dispute over goods' identity post-release remained unchanged. Due to the urgency caused by live consignments and demurrage costs, the Tribunal issued the order promptly and instructed Revenue for immediate release without delay, disposing of all three appeals accordingly.