2019 (3) TMI 720 - HC - Customs

Court Orders Release of 'Peas' and 'Dhall' Shipments with Waiver of Charges

M/s. Golden Polas International Versus The Commissioner of Customs, The Assistant/Deputy commissioner of Customs

M/s. Golden Polas International Versus The Commissioner of Customs, The Assistant/Deputy commissioner of Customs - TMI Issues Involved:1. Release of consignments under specific Bills of Lading.2. Issuance of a Detention Certificate for waiver of Demurrage and Container Detention Charges.3. Validity and applicability of various Notifications restricting import of peas and dhalls.4. Determination of the relevant date for reckoning the date of imports (Bill of Lading vs. Bill of Entry).5. Legal implications of interim stays granted by the court on the operation of the Notifications.6. Impact of government policy on the import of products available indigenously.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Release of consignments under specific Bills of Lading:The petitioners sought a writ of mandamus for the release of consignments of 'Peas' and 'Dhall' under various Bills of Lading. The court referenced an earlier order in a similar case (M/s. Royal Impex V. Commissioner of Customs) and applied the same reasoning to the present cases. The court concluded that the consignments should be released conditionally upon the petitioners remitting the duty component and furnishing a bank guarantee for 10% of the invoice value.2. Issuance of a Detention Certificate for waiver of Demurrage and Container Detention Charges:The petitioners requested a Detention Certificate for waiver of Demurrage and Container Detention Charges under Regulation 6(1)(l) of the Handling of Cargo in Customs Areas Regulations 2009. The court granted this waiver, citing Rule 6(l), which stipulates that no rent or demurrage should be charged on goods detained or confiscated by customs authorities.3. Validity and applicability of various Notifications restricting import of peas and dhalls:The court discussed several Notifications issued by the government restricting the import of peas and dhalls. These included Notification Nos. 04/2015-20, 15/2015-2020, 19/2015-20, 22/2015-20, 06/2015-20, and 37/2015-20. The court noted that the petitioners had challenged these Notifications in various Writ Petitions, and interim stays had been granted by the court. The court refrained from delving into the merits of the Notifications since the challenges were pending before another judge.4. Determination of the relevant date for reckoning the date of imports (Bill of Lading vs. Bill of Entry):The court held that the relevant date for reckoning the date of imports is the date of the Bill of Lading, as per Regulation 9.11 of the Foreign Trade Policy. This regulation overrides the reference to Section 15 of the Customs Act, which considers the date of the Bill of Entry for determining the rate of duty and tariff.5. Legal implications of interim stays granted by the court on the operation of the Notifications:The court acknowledged that interim stays on the operation of the Notifications were in force at the time of the imports. Therefore, the court concluded that the consignments in question were liable to be released, subject to the conditions mentioned earlier.6. Impact of government policy on the import of products available indigenously:The respondents argued that the Notifications were issued to protect local farmers by restricting the import of products available indigenously. The court considered this policy rationale but ultimately decided in favor of the petitioners, emphasizing the balance of convenience and the admitted facts.Conclusion:The court ordered the release of the consignments upon the petitioners meeting specific conditions related to duty payment and bank guarantees. The court also granted a waiver of demurrage charges and allowed the authorities to initiate proceedings regarding the transactions. The Writ Petitions were disposed of accordingly, with no costs imposed.