2024 (9) TMI 333 - HC - Customs

Seeking direction to release various models of Secondhand Highly Specialized Equipment - Digital Multifunction Print, Copying Scanning Machines, imported by the petitioners - whether the petitioners are entitled to the release of the various models of Secondhand Highly Specialized Equipment - Digital Multifunction Print, Copying Scanning Machines, imported by the petitioners prior to the N/N.13/2024-25, dated 20.05.2024? HELD THAT - In the present cases, the bill of ladings dated 29.04.2024, 19.04.2024, 18.04.2024, 17.04.2024, 22.04.2024 and 15.04.2024 are much before the date of impugned Notification dated 20.05.2024. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the said Notification will not be applicable to the petitioners who had already initiated the process of import and the bills of lading were raised. There shall be a direction to the respondents to consider the plea of the petitioners to release the goods by way of provisional release on condition that, the petitioners shall pay/deposit the enhanced duty amount. On receipt of such enhanced duty amount paid by the petitioners, the goods in question shall be released within a period of three (3) weeks thereafter - For payment of such duty, quantification shall be made by the Customs forthwith within one (1) week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such quantifications, the payment shall be immediately made by the petitioners and on receipt of the payment in entirety, the goods shall be released as indicated above at the outer limit of three (3) weeks.

Summary

Issues:
Release of Secondhand Highly Specialized Equipment - Digital Multifunction Print, Copying & Scanning Machines imported prior to Notification No.13/2024-25.

Detailed Analysis:
The Writ Petitions were filed to direct the respondents to release various models of Secondhand Highly Specialized Equipment imported by the petitioners. The key issue was whether the petitioners were entitled to the release of the equipment imported before Notification No.13/2024-25, which prohibited the import of such items. The petitioners argued that the date of reckoning of import should be the date of shipment/dispatch of goods, not the date of arrival at an Indian Port, citing the Handbook of Procedures issued by the DGFT.

The petitioners referred to Clause 2.17 of the Handbook, which specified the date of reckoning of import/export based on the date of shipment/dispatch. They further highlighted Clause 11.11, which detailed the date of shipment/dispatch for imports, emphasizing that the bill of ladings in their cases were dated well before the impugned notification. The bill of ladings in the present cases ranged from 15.04.2024 to 29.04.2024, all preceding the date of the notification.

The Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents agreed that the bill of lading should be considered the date of shipment and acknowledged that the bill of ladings in the current cases were dated before the impugned notification. Referring to a previous order in a related case, the Court directed the respondents to consider releasing the goods provisionally upon payment of enhanced duty by the petitioners within three weeks. The Customs were instructed to quantify the duty promptly, and upon payment, the goods were to be released. The order clarified that it did not hinder the Customs Department from proceeding with further actions, including adjudication, and allowed for the consideration of waiver of demurrage charges upon application by the petitioners.

In conclusion, the Court disposed of the Writ Petitions with the aforementioned directions, emphasizing no costs were to be awarded, and the connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed.