Release of detained transit goods against security upheld, with statutory adjudication to follow after notice to all concerned.

Where goods were detained in transit, the Court held that the consignor was entitled to release of the consignment on furnishing the security demanded, since the consignee disclaimed any ownership conflict and no prejudice to revenue would result. The detention had occurred without giving the petitioner an opportunity, but that did not bar release against security. The authority was directed to complete statutory adjudication afterwards, after notice to both the petitioner and the consignee, preserving the department's power to decide the matter on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner, as consignor of the detained goods, was entitled to release of the consignment on furnishing the security demanded, with the statutory adjudication to follow after notice.

Analysis: The goods were detained during transit and the proceedings were initiated without affording the petitioner an opportunity, although the petitioner claimed ownership of the consignment. The consignee stated that it had no ownership claim or conflict of interest. In these circumstances, the Court found that release of the goods to the petitioner on furnishing the security already demanded would not prejudice the revenue interest, while preserving the authority's power to complete adjudication under the Act after notice to all concerned.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to release of the detained consignment on depositing the security amount demanded, and the competent authority was directed to conduct adjudication thereafter after notice to the petitioner and the consignee.

---