Case Law Details
Sai Balaji Fancy Store Vs Additional Commissioner of Customs (Gr.2G) (Madras High Court)
The Madras High Court recently addressed a case involving Sai Balaji Fancy Store and the Additional Commissioner of Customs (Gr.2G). The dispute arose when imported plastic bottles meant for lab use were found to contain adult toys, prompting the Customs Department’s involvement in a re-export request.
Following a purchase order in December 2023, goods were cleared under bill of entry No. 9756252 dated January 21, 2024. Subsequently, it was discovered that alongside the intended plastic bottles, the shipment also included adult toys. Upon realizing the mis-shipment, the petitioner sought re-export of the adult toys through representations to the Customs Department.
The matter escalated with a writ petition filed to compel the Customs Department to consider and dispose of the representation dated March 19, 2024. The petitioner argued that they had paid for the imported goods under the bill of entry and sought relief limited to the disposal of the re-export request.
The Madras High Court, after hearing submissions from both sides, directed respondents to consider and dispose of the representation within eight weeks. This decision underscored the legal framework under the Customs Act, 1962, governing re-export requests and highlighted the importance of accurate shipment declarations.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks the consideration and disposal of representations submitted to the respondents for re-export of goods wrongly shipped to the petitioner and for release of plastic bottles for lab.
2. Pursuant to purchase order dated 15.12.2023 for the supply of plastic bottles for lab, goods were released for home consumption under bill of entry No.9756252 dated 21.01.2024. It was subsequently discovered that the containers also contained adult toys. Upon realising the same, the petitioner raised the issue with the China based exporter. Such exporter addressed a communication to the Customs Department seeking re-export of such adult toys and clarified that such goods were wrongly loaded along with the goods intended for the petitioner. After submitting several representations, including representation dated 19.03.2024, the present writ petition was filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the above mentioned documents and submitted that the petitioner has paid for goods imported under the above mentioned bill of entry. He further submits that the relief claimed is limited to the consideration of the representation dated 19.03.2024.
4. Avinash Wadhwani, learned standing counsel, accepts notice for all the respondents. He submits that the Customs Act, 1962 imposes requirements for requests for re-export. He further submits that the representation dated 19.03.2024 would be considered and disposed of in accordance with law.
5. In view of the above submissions, and the limited nature of the relief claimed, this writ petition may be disposed of by directing the consideration and disposal of the representation.
6. Therefore, W.P.No.15765 of 2024 is disposed of without any order as to costs by directing respondents 1 & 2 to consider and dispose of the representation dated 19.03.2024 in accordance with law within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Author Bio
