2018 (10) TMI 335 - HC - Customs

High Court permits reexport of Dry Batteries, mandates Bank Guarantee & Undertaking for Customs Duty

The High Court allowed the petitioner to reexport a consignment of Dry Batteries amidst ongoing investigations, emphasizing the petitioner's right to ... Levy of IGST - import of goods - petitioner Unit was situated in a SEZ - Held that:- Considering the issues arising, let there be Notice, returnable on 25.10.2018. By way of adinterim relief, the respondents are directed to permit reexport of the goods in question on condition that the Director of the petitioner Company files an Undertaking before this Court latest by 09.10.2018 that eventually, if the Court does not accept the petitioner’s contention noted above, then the petitioner shall furnish the remaining Bank Guarantee. Direct service for respondent nos.2 & 3 is permitted. Issues:1. Reexport of consignment of Dry Batteries2. Adequacy of Bank Guarantee for Customs Duty3. Ignored aspect of no IGST levy for SEZ unit4. Goods deteriorating and lying unutilizedAnalysis:1. The petitioner sought permission to reexport a consignment of Dry Batteries due to controversies surrounding its import. The High Court, in a previous order, modified conditions to allow reexport, emphasizing the ongoing investigation and the petitioner's right to defend its position during adjudication.2. Following the court's order, the petitioner provided a Bank Guarantee, which the Deputy Commissioner of Customs deemed inadequate. The Commissioner calculated the Customs Duty on the redetermined value of goods, requiring additional Bank Guarantee. The petitioner contested this, citing the non-levy of IGST for goods imported to a SEZ unit and the deteriorating condition of the goods.3. The petitioner's counsel highlighted the oversight of not levying IGST for SEZ units while computing Customs Duty. The Court, considering the issues, directed a Notice returnable on a specified date and granted ad interim relief, allowing reexport of the goods subject to the petitioner's Director filing an Undertaking by a specified deadline.4. Recognizing the urgency due to the goods deteriorating and lying unutilized, the Court permitted direct service for the concerned respondents. The judgment aimed to address the adequacy of the Bank Guarantee, the non-levy of IGST for SEZ units, and the need for timely action to prevent further deterioration of the goods.