TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appellant's Right to Seek Release Condition Reconsideration: Tribunal Directs Prompt Review</h1> The Tribunal emphasized the appellant's right to request reconsideration of release conditions before the adjudicating authority, directing a prompt ... Provisional release of goods - Section 129 B of the Customs Act - HELD THAT:- There is no bar for the appellant to make request for reconsideration of the conditions imposed for provisional release of the seized goods before the adjudicating authority. In the present case appellant have done so. Once such a request has been made the adjudicating authority should consider such request and dispose of the same - CBEC vide Circular dated 35/2017-Cus., dated 16.08.2017 issued “Guidelines for provisional release of seized imported goods pending adjudication under Section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962 –reg”. These also should be taken into account by the adjudicating authority while disposing of the representation made by the appellants before him. The ends of justice will be met if the adjudicating authority is directed to consider the representation dated 6.12.2019 made by the appellant before him - Appeal allowed by way of remand. Issues Involved:1. Maintainability of the appeal under Section 129B of the Customs Act.2. Validity of the conditions imposed for provisional release of seized goods.3. Consideration of representation for modification of release conditions.4. Applicability of CBEC guidelines for provisional release of seized goods.5. Directions to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration of representation.Issue 1: Maintainability of the appeal under Section 129B of the Customs ActThe appellant, an importer of goods, challenged the order of provisional release communicated by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs. The appellant contended that the appeal was maintainable, citing a decision of the Bombay High Court. The Revenue argued that the appellant was not the importer mentioned in the release letter and therefore could not file the appeal under Section 129B. The Tribunal did not delve into maintainability but emphasized the appellant's right to request reconsideration of release conditions before the adjudicating authority.Issue 2: Validity of the conditions imposed for provisional release of seized goodsThe appellant raised concerns about the harsh conditions imposed for the provisional release of seized goods. The Revenue contended that the determination of bond value and security fell under the adjudicating authority's jurisdiction. The Tribunal did not address the validity of the conditions but directed the adjudicating authority to consider the appellant's representation for modification of the release conditions, emphasizing the need for expeditious disposal due to the live consignment nature of the case.Issue 3: Consideration of representation for modification of release conditionsThe Tribunal highlighted the appellant's representation to modify the release conditions, stressing that the adjudicating authority should review and decide on the request. It was noted that the appellant's representation should be considered in light of CBEC guidelines for provisional release of seized goods pending adjudication under Section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962.Issue 4: Applicability of CBEC guidelines for provisional release of seized goodsThe Tribunal referenced CBEC Circular dated 16.08.2017, providing 'Guidelines for provisional release of seized imported goods pending adjudication.' It directed the adjudicating authority to consider these guidelines while addressing the appellant's representation for modifying the release conditions, ensuring a comprehensive review in line with the established procedures.Issue 5: Directions to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration of representationThe Tribunal concluded by instructing the adjudicating authority to evaluate the appellant's representation dated 6.12.2019 promptly, preferably within a month of receiving the order. It emphasized the importance of affording the appellant a personal hearing and granting due consideration to the representation without expressing any opinion on its merits, aiming to ensure justice and procedural fairness in the resolution of the matter.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
