Growlam Office Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs (Madras High Court)
The Madras High Court addressed a writ petition filed by Growlam Office Private Limited, seeking a direction to the Customs Department to provisionally release a consignment of imported used Digital Multifunction Print Copying and Scanning machines (MFDs) under Section 110A of the Customs Act.
The petitioner argued that the imported used, second-hand, highly specialised equipment (HSEs) had been subjected to examination by a DGFT approved Chartered Engineer, who provided a report and certificate to the Customs Officer. Despite this, the respondents proceeded to seize and potentially forfeit the goods.
The High Court noted that the issue was squarely covered by its earlier order in a batch of writ petitions (W.P.No.29418 of 2024 dated 10.07.2025). The relevant portions of the earlier order detailed the legal position on the import of MFDs and their provisional release.
Key Findings from the Precedent Order:
1. Applicability of HOW Rules: The Court addressed the plea that MFDs fall under “other wastes” as defined by the Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016 (HOW Rules), and therefore, are restricted items requiring prior government permission. The Court noted that Rule 13(2) of the HOW Rules states that permission from the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change is not required for the import of “other wastes” listed in Part D of Schedule III. The only requirement is that the importer must file certain documents to the Customs Authorities, which the petitioner claimed to have fulfilled. Based on a prima facie consideration of the HOW Rules, the Court found no prohibition for the import of MFDs.
2. Benefit of Doubt and Provisional Release: The Court observed that the petitioner’s claim that MFDs are HSEs and therefore exempt from the application of the CRO, 2021, and its amendments, was prima facie supported by prior decisions of the Madras High Court and a Telangana High Court decision (upheld by the Supreme Court) that permitted provisional release for other importers and found MFDs to be HSEs and freely importable. The Court applied the “benefit of doubt” principle to the importer at the provisional release stage, particularly since the goods were not contraband or security-affecting items.
3. Provisional Release is Reversible: The Court confirmed that provisional release under Section 110A of the Customs Act does not prevent the department from reversing its decision. The provisional release order is subject to final adjudication, which can still result in confiscation, penalties, or duties.
Following the principles established in the earlier binding decision, the Madras High Court disposed of the writ petition by issuing specific directions for provisional release. The Customs Department, Chennai, was directed to:
- Pass orders for the provisional release of the goods by imposing conditions deemed fit under the Customs Act within four weeks.
- Release the goods to the petitioner within two weeks of the petitioner fulfilling the imposed conditions.
- Explicitly state that the provisional release remains subject to final adjudication by the Customs Department.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
