Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the confiscated imported food additive, having limited shelf life and being fit for human consumption, should be released pending appeal on the appellant furnishing a bank guarantee for the redemption fine.
Analysis: The imported goods were food additives with a limited shelf life, and the Court accepted that delay would materially affect their utility. The goods were also found fit for human consumption. In these circumstances, and since the redemption fine had been quantified, the Court considered it appropriate to secure the revenue by directing the appellant to furnish a bank guarantee for the amount fixed as redemption fine before release of the goods. The direction ensured that the pendency of the appeal would not render the goods useless while protecting the interests of the respondents.
Conclusion: The goods were ordered to be released on the appellant furnishing a bank guarantee of Rs. 30 lakhs towards redemption fine to the satisfaction of the first respondent, and the release was to follow within two weeks thereafter.
Ratio Decidendi: Where imported goods are perishable or have a limited shelf life and are fit for consumption, interim release may be directed pending appeal on adequate security such as a bank guarantee for the quantified redemption fine.