AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Honourable Mr. Justice M. Jaichandren
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that the petitioner had imported cosmetic goods from M/s. Falcon Gulf Logistics
Pte., Ltd., Singapore, vide Invoice No. FGL/797/2011, dated 14.10.2011. The Bill of Entry No. 5025442, dated 27.10.2011, had also been
filed and the petitioner had claimed the clearance of the goods, for home consumption. However, the respondents had detained the goods stating
that the petitioner had under valued the goods in question. While so, summons had been issued to the petitioner, by the officers of the Directorate
of Revenue Intelligence. The petitioner had appeared before the Enquiry Officer and had furnished the necessary documents. Thereafter, the value
of the goods had been assessed. The petitioner had paid the duty amount of Rs. 11,10,044/-, on 28.10.2011, on the value of Rs. 37,44,808/-.
However, the respondents had not released the goods. While so, the third respondent had issued a communication, dated 20.2.2012, after the
filing of the present writ petition, which reads as follows:
It is informed that the Additional Commissioner of Customs (Group 2) has allowed Provisional Release of the goods u/s 110A of the Customs
Act, 1962, imported vide B/E No. 5025442, dated 27.10.2011 filed by M/s. S.S. Impex, Pune subject to the fulfillment of the conditions given
below:
(i) Submission of suitable Bond for the provisional value of the goods for Rs. 47,53,594/-(Rupees Forty Seven Lakhs fifty three thousand five
hundred and ninety four only).
(ii) Submission of a Bank Guarantee for Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Only).
You are directed to approach the Assistant Commissioner (Group 2) for further necessary action.
In such circumstances, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that the petitioner would furnish a simple bond for
the provisional value of the goods, for Rs. 48,00,000/- and would also deposit a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/-, as part of the differential duty. The
learned counsel had further prayed that on the petitioner furnishing the bond and on making the payment, as stated above, the third respondent may
be directed to release the goods in question, forthwith. He had also submitted that the petitioner would co-operate, fully, in the adjudication
proceedings to be initiated by the respondents.
In such circumstances, the petitioner is directed to furnish a bond for a sum of Rs. 48,00,000/-, for the provisional value of the goods to the
satisfaction of the third respondent. The petitioner shall also deposit a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/-, before the third respondent, as part of the differential
duty said to be payable by the petitioner. On complying with the above conditions, the respondent shall release the goods in question, within a
period of ten days thereafter. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.