Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Custom Duty

Delhi HC Imposes Costs on Customs Officer for Unnecessary Harassment of Importers

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2025 taxguru.in 11841
Case Name
TECHSYNC Vs Superintendent of Customs SIIB ACC Imports And Ors (Delhi High Court)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Advertisement

TECHSYNC Vs Superintendent of Customs SIIB ACC Imports And Ors (Delhi High Court)

The Delhi High Court heard Review Petition Nos. 586/2025 and 568/2025 filed by the Customs Department under Order XLVII Rule 1 read with Sections 114 and 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Department sought a review of the Court’s earlier order dated 30 October 2025, which had directed the provisional release of imported goods belonging to the petitioners. In that earlier order, the Court had also instructed the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) to undertake inter-ministerial consultations for establishing a uniform policy regarding the import of products declared as body massagers or sex toys, to ensure consistent application of policy across cases.

In seeking review, the Customs Department argued that the imported goods required a licence or certificate from the Drug Controller General of India (DCGI). They also contended that the petitioners had not provided an Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Registration Certificate under the Battery Waste Management Rules, 2022, asserting that some imported products were battery-operated and therefore needed such certification.

The petitioners opposed the review and submitted three broad points. First, they argued that the Customs Department was repeating the same objections that had already been raised and considered when the Court passed the order on 30 October 2025. Therefore, no ground for review existed. Second, they relied on the Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation’s Frequently Asked Questions (Medical Devices Division), specifically Question No. 51, which states that massagers intended for general wellness or soothing purposes and not for therapeutic use do not fall within the regulatory scope of the Medical Devices Rules, 2017. Third, the petitioners submitted that the EPR Certificate could be obtained even after release of the goods, citing Public Notice 46/2023 dated 25 May 2023 issued by the Commissioner of Customs, which explicitly permits filing such applications after release.

Paid content

Become a Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Premium member.

Advertisement

Author Info

CA Sandeep Kanoi
Qualification: CA in Job / Business
Company: Taxguru Consultancy
Location: Mumbai, Maharashtra
Articles Published: 21,146

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.