2016 (4) TMI 1105 - HC - Customs

Court rules on Customs Act petition, directs representation for release of goods, clarifies origin rules

M/s Radha Krishana Commodities Trade And Another Versus Superintendent (Prevention), Customs And Another

The court declined to quash the summons under section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, requiring the petitioners to provide a statement and submit documents. ... Seeking release of goods apprehended from the vehicles - Demand of 40% of value of goods - Deposited the tax demanded by Commercial Tax Tribunal for release of goods - Appellant submitted that truck contained some goods of Indian origin and some goods of foreign origin and, therefore, the goods of Indian origin could not have been the subject matter of proceedings before the Customs Department so, the goods of Indian origin have to be released pursuant to the order passed by the Tribunal and the goods of foreign origin can also be released subject to payment of fine under the provisions of section 125 of the Customs Act. Held that:- it will be appropriate that the petitioners may file a representation before the Superintendent (Prevention), Customs Department, Lucknow Division, Lucknow raising all grievances. The petitioners can also apprise the officer that the goods of Indian origin are outside his jurisdiction and that even the goods of foreign origin can be released subject to payment of fine. If such a representation is filed, we have no reason to doubt that the Superintendent (Prevention), above shall take a decision expeditiously. - Petition disposed of Issues:Quashing of summons under section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 and release of apprehended goods from the vehicle.Analysis:The petition sought to quash the summons dated 18 March 2016 issued by the Superintendent (Prevention), Customs Department, Lucknow Division under section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962. Additionally, the petitioners requested the release of goods apprehended from their vehicle. The vehicle was intercepted by the Mobile Squad, Commercial Tax, Kanpur, and a show cause notice was issued. Subsequently, a demand for 40% of the goods' value was made, leading to a series of legal actions by the petitioners. Despite depositing the tax as directed, the goods were not released, prompting the petition for relief. The petitioners argued that the summons should be set aside due to procedural irregularities, including the absence of the petitioners during sample collection. They also contended that goods of Indian origin, subject to release as per the Tribunal's order, should not be part of the Customs Department proceedings.The court declined to interfere with the summons dated 18 March 2016, stating that it merely required the petitioners to provide a statement and submit documents, leaving it to the petitioners to clarify the factual situation. However, concerning the release of goods, the court directed the petitioners to file a representation before the Superintendent (Prevention), Customs Department, Lucknow Division, outlining all grievances. The petitioners were advised to inform the officer that goods of Indian origin fall outside the Customs Department's jurisdiction and that foreign origin goods could be released upon payment of fines under section 125 of the Customs Act. The court expected the Superintendent to make a decision promptly, preferably within ten days of receiving the representation. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of with the aforementioned instructions and observations.