Minal Gems Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court)
The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of M/s Minal Gems v. Union of India [WP. No. 7993 of 2021 dated July 07, 2021] directed the Adjudicating Authority to consider the prayers of provisional release of seized goods of the assessee, during the pendency of the proceedings under the Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962.
Facts:
M/s Minal Gems (“the Petitioner”) is a jewelry manufacturer and exports cut and polished diamonds. The cut and polished diamond which sought to be exported were seized by the Revenue Department.
On February 02, 2021, the Petitioner filed an application for provisional release of seized goods to the Adjudicating Authority (“the AA”). The AA rejected the prayer of the Petitioner and issued a Show Cause Notice (“SCN”) dated April 20, 2021, under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962 (“the Customs Act”) questioning the Petitioner to explain why the seized goods should not be confiscated.
Further the Petitioner again on May 20, 2021, prayed for provisional release of the seized goods under Section 110A of the Customs Act to the Joint/Additional Commissioner of Customs (“the Respondent”).
The Petitioner’s contention is that, notwithstanding the pendency of proceedings under section 124 of the Act, there is nothing in the Act that precludes consideration of an application for provisional release of goods under section 110A of the Customs Act.
On the other hand, the Respondent submits that, once proceedings under section 124 of the Act has been initiated, question of considering an application for provisional release of the seized goods does not arise.
Issue:
