2015 (10) TMI 2123 - HC - Customs

Release of goods confiscated under Section 114 - Delay in adjudication pursuant to SCN - Petitoner contends that inordinate delay by Customs in taking further action has caused grave prejudice and pleads for provisional unconditional release of goods - Respondents contend that its a case of over-invoicing and petitioner is seeking undue advantage by way of unjustified drawbacks - Held That - Issue of SCN was delayed; goods were sought to be exported in February 2012, notice was issued on 13.12.2013 - CBEC circular is not universally applicable and same talks about genuine exports which itself is under dispute in this case - Respondents directed to adjudicate the matter as expeditiously as possible and in any event within three months - Decided partly in favour of Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Delay in release of goods for export, applicability of CBEC Circular, delay in issuance of Show Cause Notice, necessity of conducting adjudication expeditiously.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought the release of goods for export unconditionally, which were detained by Customs authorities for investigation despite the declared FOB value being Rs. 22,00,278. The petitioner argued that the delay in investigation caused cancellation of export order and additional charges. The petitioner relied on a Circular by CBEC emphasizing the need to facilitate genuine exports without unnecessary delays.

2. The respondents contended that the value of goods was actually Rs. 5,04,561, not Rs. 22 lakhs as declared, indicating over-invoicing. A Show Cause Notice proposing confiscation and penalty under Section 114 of the Customs Act was issued on 13.12.2013. The Court noted a delay in issuing the notice but did not delve into the petitioner's contributory delay. The Court found the CBEC Circular not universally applicable, especially in cases where the genuineness of export claims is disputed.

3. The Court directed the respondents to conduct an adjudication promptly pursuant to the Show Cause Notice, to be completed within three months. The Court emphasized the need for expeditious resolution of the matter, considering the specific circumstances of the case. The writ petition was disposed of with this direction, focusing on the necessity of timely adjudication in customs matters to prevent undue delays and uncertainties for the parties involved.