Case Law Details
Ocean Sky Impex Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs (Madras High Court)
Madras High Court in the case of Ocean Sky Impex Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs related to provisional release of seized goods granted petitioner an opportunity for a personal hearing.
The Madras High Court recently made a significant ruling in the case of Ocean Sky Impex Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs. The court called for the issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to provisionally release the goods imported under specific bills of entry that had been seized, and to grant a hearing opportunity to the petitioner.
The petitioner’s goods had been seized under a memo, and the petitioner subsequently sought their provisional release for re-export, if necessary, under reasonable conditions to safeguard revenue. The court was informed that the petitioner had already made an application for the provisional release of the goods.
In light of these circumstances, the Madras High Court directed the respondent to pass orders on the petitioner’s application within ten days, after providing an opportunity for a personal hearing. The court emphasized the importance of giving advance notice to the petitioner to ensure that the final orders on his application are passed without further delay.
The decision by the Madras High Court in the Ocean Sky Impex Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs case underlines the significance of ensuring due process in the handling of seized goods. The court emphasized the necessity for a timely response to applications for provisional release and the importance of providing a hearing opportunity to safeguard the interests of the involved parties.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
With the consent of both the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
2. The Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of Writ of Mandamus to the respondents to release the goods imported under the Bill of Entry No.2214121 dated 29.08.2022 seized vide seizure memo dated 18.11.2022 and Bills of Entry Nos.2299525 dated 04.09.2022 and 2299510 dated 04.09.2022 and subsequently seized by them under Seizure Memo dated 19.10.2022 provisionally for re-export only, subject to reasonable conditions, if necessary, for safeguarding the revenue.
3. This Writ Petition was taken up for admission yesterday and adjourned to today, to enable the respondents to get necessary instructions.
4. Today, it is brought to the notice of this Court and admitted by all the parties concerned that the petitioner has already made an application on 19.04.2023 for provisional release of the goods.
5. In such view of the matter, it would be just and equitable to direct the first respondent to pass orders on the petitioner’s application dated 19.04.2023, within a period of ten (10) days from today, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, by putting the petitioner on advance notice so that the final orders are passed on his application within 10 days, without any further delay.
6. With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
