Case Law Details
Exim Incorporation (Through its Proprietor – Gaurav Gupta) Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court)
Conclusion: Since the authorities had detained the goods without affecting seizure and they had exceeded the time limit for detention of the goods even if it was construed to be a case of seizure therefore, authorities were directed to forthwith release the imported goods of assessee covered by the bill of entry on completion of the necessary legal formalities.
Held: Assessee was engaged in the business of importing miscellaneous goods having the required importer exporter code. In the course of business, assessee had purchased pathogens pistachio (pistachio nut in-shell) from foreign supplier in California, United States vide bill of lading dated 05.04.2019. Upon arrival of the goods at Nhava Sheva Port, it filed bill of entry declaring the goods as per import documents at Rs.1,17,78,882.10 on which duty payable was Rs.28,64,624.00. The goods were sent for testing whereafter no objection was granted following which import release order was passed on 03.06.2019. Prior to this, on 30.05.2019 assessee had paid the entire customs duty. It might be mentioned that no assessment was prescribed. However, despite all clearances and payment of customs duty, assessee did not release the goods for home consumption. Aggrieved by the illegal detention of the imported goods and non-examination of the same on the ground of non-appearance of the proprietor, the present writ petition had been filed seeking the relief. It was held that first illegality was that authorities had detained the goods without affecting seizure and secondly, they had exceeded the time limit for detention of the goods even if it was construed to be a case of seizure. In such circumstances, the impugned action could not at all be justified and was liable to be appropriately interfered with. Further, it was held that if authorities had any grievance regarding non-response of assessee to its summons, it could certainly raise the issue before the Calcutta High Court but that could not be a justification for detaining the goods at Nhava Sheva for more than one year. Authorities were put on notice that henceforth Court might consider imposition of cost if any instance of misuse of power or such unauthorized and unlawful action was found on adjudication. Consequently, authorities were directed to forthwith release the imported goods of assessee covered by the bill of entry on completion of the necessary legal formalities and in any case within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and order.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT
1. Heard Ms. Anjali Manish, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly, learned senior counsel for the respondents.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
