Vimpro Tech Vs Commissioner of Customs (Madras High Court)
The Madras High Court allowed the writ petition challenging rejection of the petitioner’s request for provisional release of goods imported under Bill of Entry No. 4355530 dated 07.09.2025. The goods, described as plastic spare parts, were detained by Customs on the ground of misdeclaration. The Department considered them plastic spares for lighters and took the view that they fell under Chapter 96 rather than Chapter 13 of the Customs Tariff Act, attracting Basic Customs Duty of 10% instead of 5%.
The Court considered Section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962, which provides for provisional release of seized goods subject to conditions. It referred to CBIC Circular No.35/2017-Customs dated 16.08.2017 and held, following Additional Director General (Adjudication) v. Its My Name Pvt. Ltd., that executive instructions cannot override the statutory provision for provisional release. The Court also noted that the petitioner produced an official memorandum dated 06.2025 authorising import of goods described as plastic shells and spare parts for manufacturing gas lighters.
The Court held that classification, alleged misdeclaration, applicability of DGFT notifications and differential customs duty were matters for adjudication. Pending investigation, therefore, was not by itself sufficient to deny provisional release. The impugned order dated 17.04.2026 was set aside.
