2021 (8) TMI 343 - HC - Customs

Seeking provisional release of the export consignment - despite compliance of the conditions contained in the order, the consignment was not released - Section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT - There are no reason to keep the application pending in view of the order passed by the adjudicating authority on March 11, 2021 without any reservation. Once the reasoned order for provisional released has been passed in respect of the relevant consignment under the provisions of section 110A of the said Act and the conditions for such provisional release have been complied with by the applicant/petitioner, we fail to comprehend as to how such an administrative order could be cited as a precedent in future cases so as to preclude us from making an order as prayed for in the interim application. The interim application stands disposed of with a direction upon the respondents to effect provisional release of the relevant consignment as early as possible, but not later than 10 days from service of a copy of this order on them

Summary

Issues:
Interim order for provisional release of export consignment under Section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962; Compliance with conditions for provisional release; Delay in provisionally releasing goods despite compliance; Challenge of a previous order before the Supreme Court; Request for direction to accept Bank Guarantee and allow export.

Analysis:
1. The writ petition sought an interim order for the provisional release of an export consignment under Section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962. A co-ordinate bench directed the adjudicating authority to pass an appropriate order considering all relevant materials, including a previous court order. The authority was required to pass the order within ten days, with the petition made returnable on a specified date.

2. The adjudicating authority, in compliance with the court's order, issued an order on March 11, 2021, for the provisional release of goods under specific conditions, including furnishing a bond and security. However, the petitioner claimed that despite meeting these conditions, the consignment had not been released, leading to a request for direction to accept a Bank Guarantee and allow export.

3. The respondent's counsel mentioned that a previous order was under challenge before the Supreme Court and requested time to file a reply affidavit with relevant facts. While not disputing the correctness of the contentions raised in the interim application, the counsel sought two weeks for the provisional release of goods, without prejudice to their rights in the pending Supreme Court proceedings.

4. After hearing arguments from both parties, the court found no reason to keep the application pending, as the adjudicating authority had already issued a reasoned order for provisional release. The court emphasized that the administrative order should not serve as a precedent to prevent granting the relief sought in the interim application. Consequently, the court disposed of the interim application, directing the respondents to effect the provisional release within ten days of receiving the order.

5. The court scheduled the writ petition, along with similar pending matters, for listing after one month, indicating a follow-up on the case's progress and related issues.