Court quashes order, directs goods mutilation within 3 weeks. Petitioner's Customs Act rights upheld.

The court quashed the impugned order and directed the respondents to permit mutilation of goods at the petitioner's cost within three weeks. The petitioner's right under Section 110 of the Customs Act was not invoked, leading to the decision in favor of the petitioner. Compliance formalities for mutilation were to be facilitated by the respondents, and the writ petition was allowed without costs.

---

---

Issues:
1. Provisional release of imported consignment.
2. Interpretation of Section 24 of the Customs Act, 1962.
3. Cost of mutilation and clearance of goods.
4. Judicial precedents on denaturing or mutilation of goods.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner imported a consignment which the respondent claimed contained usable paper, while the petitioner argued that the goods were mutilated and therefore duty-free. The respondent ordered provisional release of the goods, which was challenged in the writ petition.

2. Section 24 of the Customs Act, 1962 allows denaturing or mutilation of goods to render them unfit for certain purposes, with applicable duty rates. Despite the absence of specific rules by the Central Government, courts have consistently applied this provision in favor of the assessee, allowing conversion of goods into waste and scrap for clearance.

3. The standing counsel argued that the cost of mutilation should be borne by the petitioner and included in the FOB. The petitioner agreed to bear the cost, leading to the conclusion that the goods would be mutilated at the petitioner's expense but under the supervision of the third respondent, with the cost included in FOB.

4. Judicial precedents, including decisions by tribunals and High Courts, support the view that the customs authority can mutilate goods if deemed necessary, and the petitioner can request such action. The impugned order was quashed as the petitioner had not invoked their right under Section 110 of the Customs Act, and the respondents were directed to permit mutilation of goods at the petitioner's cost within three weeks, with compliance of formalities facilitated by the respondents. The writ petition was allowed without costs.

---