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 condition requiring furnishing of a bank guarantee, in addition to a bond, for provisional release of export goods allegedly misdeclared and overvalued was onerous or unjustifiable.
Analysis: The dispute was limited to the propriety of the conditions imposed for provisional release, since the merits of the alleged misclassification, overvaluation, and possible higher IGST refund claim were left for adjudication. The applicable customs circulars permit provisional release of detained or seized export goods suspected of misdeclaration on execution of a bond equivalent to the value of the goods together with appropriate security to cover redemption fine and penalty. On the facts, the goods were intercepted on intelligence, and the revenue's apprehension was that the exporter may seek a higher refund and that the goods may be liable to confiscation. In that setting, insistence on a bank guarantee was held to be a reasonable measure to protect revenue interests. The alternative request to furnish immovable property security in place of the bank guarantee was also left open for consideration by the authority.
Conclusion: The condition requiring a bank guarantee was upheld and was not found to be arbitrary or unreasonable.
Ratio Decidendi: Where export goods are provisionally released during investigation into alleged misdeclaration or overvaluation, the customs authorities may insist on bond and appropriate security, including a bank guarantee, to safeguard the revenue.