2023 (4) TMI 1085 - HC - Customs

Seeking release of consignment of the petitioner imported by the petitioner - refund of detention and demurrage charges, if any - imposing of condition of furnishing bond of full value of the goods with furnishing of the Bank Guarantee of differential duty calculated at 200% of Basic Customs Duty and Integrated Goods and Service Tax - HELD THAT - When the goods arrived at the destination port Mundra in 10 containers, a bill of lading dated 31.07.2021 was also issued, recorded therein the details of the consignment. The consignment was imported under bill of Entry No. 4961272, as stated above. It appears that inquiry was initiated by the authorities in respect of the import of magnesite lumps made by the petitioner. While the case of the petitioner was that the country from which the import originated was Turkey, the inquiry revealed that in that regard no details were available. Not only that the authorities suspected that the country of original was different and could be the Pakistan - It was on the aforesaid ground that the goods imported by the petitioner under the above description and Bill of Entry came to be detained by the Customs Authorities. For the purpose of the release of the goods, the condition as above, as reflected in Communication dated 25.10.2021 of respondent no. 2 was imposed. In BESTO TRADELINK LIMITED VERSUS PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS 2022 (5) TMI 590 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT , the petitioner had prayed for release of the consignment of the goods imported in Bill of Exchange No. 4964569. The goods were the same in respect of which the inquiry was undertaken in relation to the country of origin and it was suspected by the authorities that they were from different country Pakistan, than the the country indicated by the petitioner - As in the case of Besto Tradelink Limited, in the present case also, the inquiry is underway by the authorities and it may take further time before it may be concluded. The Court in Besto Tradelink Limited, in set of similar facts directed provisional release of the goods upon compliance of the conditions by the petitioner. In view of the operative facts and in light of the decision in Besto Tradelink Limited, competent respondent authority is directed to provisionally release the goods of the petitioners, provided the petitioner satisfies the conditions imposed - petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the imposition of conditions for the release of goods by the Customs Authorities, the origin of the imported goods, and the application of a previous court decision to the current case.

Imposition of Conditions for Release of Goods:
The petitioner filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution to direct the respondent authorities to release the consignment imported under Bill of Entry No. 4961272 on suitable terms. The respondent authority had imposed a condition requiring the petitioner to furnish a bond of the full value of the goods along with a Bank Guarantee of 200% of Basic Customs Duty and Integrated Goods and Service Tax for provisional release. The petitioner contended that this condition was harsh and arbitrary, contrary to a previous court order in a similar case.

Origin of Imported Goods:
The petitioner, engaged in trading, purchased a consignment of magnesite lumps from a party in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. The goods were imported under a specific Bill of Entry, but authorities suspected a discrepancy in the country of origin. The Customs Authorities detained the goods due to suspicions that the country of origin might be different from what was declared. This led to the imposition of conditions for the release of the goods, similar to a previous case.

Application of Previous Court Decision:
A previous court decision in a case involving similar circumstances was cited, where provisional release of goods was directed upon compliance with certain conditions. In line with this precedent, the competent respondent authority was directed to provisionally release the goods of the petitioners subject to specific conditions, including payment of assessed duty, furnishing of a bank guarantee, submission of a bond for differential duty, and completion of the investigation process within a specified timeframe. The court emphasized that it did not express any opinion on the merits of the issue, leaving it for adjudication by the competent authority.

Disposition:
The petition was disposed of with the direction for provisional release of goods under the specified conditions. Any adverse developments in the future would entitle the petitioner to seek appropriate legal remedies based on fresh cause of action.