9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 1146X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dent regarding importation of 'Mulberry Raw Silk' imported through Kolkata, Port and detained the goods on the ground that the documents pertaining to said goods were not available with the caretaker of the premises. 2.1 Subsequently, the said documents were submitted to DRI, Varanasi Unit and the same was informed to DRI vide letter dated 14.06.2016. The request was also made to DRI that the respondent's firm may be allowed to sell the goods. 2.2 Further, the respondent vide letter dated 24.06.2016 made request to Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata and Additional Director General of DRI (New-Delhi) to release the said goods provisionally under Section 110A of Customs Act, 1962. 2.3 Accordingly, the Deputy Commissioner of Cu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eligible for unconditional release of the said good in terms of Section 110(2) of the Customs Act. 2.9 The respondent vide various letters dated 15.02.2018, 08.03.2018, 10.04.2018, 03.05.2018 & 18.05.2018 requested the Commissioner of Customs (Port) to release the said Bank Guarantee in terms of Section 110(2) of the Customs Act, as no Show Cause Notice was issued within six months and within the extended period of six months, But vide letter dated 03.08.2018, The Deputy Commissioner of Customs (Port), denied release of Bank Guarantee on the ground that Show Cause Notice is still awaited from the DRI. It was also mentioned in the said letter that "As per Section 110(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 as amended by the Finance Act, 2018 (Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he goods in 2016 provisionally. Therefore, the Revenue is duty bound to issue the show-cause notice within extended period of six months by the ld.Commissioner (Port), which they failed to do so. 6. In that circumstances, we do agree with the observations made by the ld.Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order and no show-cause notice was issued to the respondent within extended period of six months in terms of Section 110(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 as existed at the time of seizure of the goods. 7. In view of the above, no proceeding is sustainable against the respondent and they are entitled to release of the goods, the personal Bond and Bank guarantee. 8. In view of the above, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
