2019 (9) TMI 991 - HC - Customs

Provisional release of seized goods - Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT - We are not inclined to grant any further time as the prayer sought in the petition has been worked out - If the petitioners are aggrieved with the order dated 26 th August, 2019 they have an alternative remedy of an appeal under the Act. Petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Petition under Article 226 challenging seizure and non-provisional release of imported goods under Customs Act, 1962; Amendment sought to challenge order allowing provisional release; Appealability of order for provisional release under the Act.

Analysis:
The petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was filed, highlighting the grievance that imported goods were seized under the Customs Act, 1962, and despite requesting provisional release under Section 110A of the Act, it was not granted. The petitioners sought relief regarding the release of Amorphous Alloy Ribbon 5 ply Lamination goods imported under three Bills of Entry.

The respondents, represented by Mr. Jetly, informed the Court that the petitioners' prayer for expeditious release of the goods had been addressed. An order dated 26th August, 2019, provisionally released the goods under Section 110A of the Act, rendering the petition moot. The respondents contended that there was no further relief required in the petition.

However, Mr. Sanghavi, counsel for the petitioners, requested to amend the petition to challenge the order allowing provisional release of the goods. The Court noted that the order for provisional release dated 26th August, 2019 was appealable under the Act, citing the precedent set by the Commissioner of Customs (Import) Vs. S.S. Offshore Pvt. Ltd. 361 ELT 51.

The Court, considering the appealable nature of the order for provisional release, declined to grant further time as the relief sought in the petition had been granted. It was emphasized that if the petitioners were dissatisfied with the order dated 26th August, 2019, they had the option to appeal under the Act. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, with no order as to costs being issued.