Case Law Details
Black Gold Technologies Vs Union of India (Madras High Court)
In the Instant case, the petitioner is seeking provisional released for the goods seized by the customs officer due to mis-declaration of the cargo in order to circumvent the import restriction imposed by the extant Foreign Trade Policy.
High Court states that, as per Schedule 3 there are two parts. Part A contains a list of hazardous wastes applicable for import and export with prior informed consent. Part B contains the list of other wastes applicable for import and export and not requiring prior informed consent. Schedule VI sets out hazardous and other wastes prohibited for import. It is not the case of the respondents that the imported goods in the case on hand fall under Schedule VI. Once the application of the Schedule VI of the 2016 Rules is ruled out, the only question is whether the import of the goods is free or restricted. Under either case, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Atul Automations, provisional release is very much permissible. The respondents have seized the goods under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962. Therefore, Section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962 will automatically kick in. As per Section 110A, “Any goods, documents or things seized under Section 110, may, pending the order of the adjudicating authority be released to the owner on taking a bond from him in the proper form with such security and conditions as the adjudicating authority may require.” Further, the statutory scheme obtaining in the Customs Act, 1962, the Foreign Trade Development and Regulation Act, 1992, Foreign Trade (Regulation) Rules, 1993 and the earlier Hazardous Wastes Rules concluded that despite the fact that the goods, whose import is restricted in terms of the Foreign Trade Policy, should be construed to be prohibited goods, there is no bar for the release of the goods. The learned Judge also noted that it is not open to the customs authorities to insist on re-export. This was to be done only by the authorities specified in Schedule VII of the Hazardous and Other Wastes Rules, 2016. As in that case, in the present case also, no proceedings have been initiated by the authorities in terms of the Hazardous Wastes Rules for directing the petitioners to re-export the goods. High Court therefore of the view that the petitioners are entitled to provisional release of the goods under Section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962. Therefore, the respondents are directed to assess and permit the provisional release of the goods in question upon payment of applicable duties of customs subject however to the eventual adjudication. The respondents shall release the goods after assessing and collecting the customs duty and other charges provisionally within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT
The petitioners had imported consignments of “Used Rubber Tyre Cut in Two Pieces”. According to the petitioners, the said goods are freely importable and they are meant for manufacturing “rubber crumbs” to be eventually used for road laying.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
