Tribunal orders release of seized goods for export, deems notice extension without jurisdiction

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the provisional release of seized warehoused goods for export without duty payment, based on a bond. The decision emphasized the goods' intended export purpose and compliance with Foreign Trade Policy. The extension of the show cause notice period by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence was deemed without jurisdiction, leading to the unconditional release of goods for re-export. The issue of demurrage and storage charges waiver was not directly addressed but the appellant was granted liberty to seek a waiver certificate from the relevant authority.

---

---

Issues:
- Provisional release of seized warehoused goods for export
- Extension of show cause notice period
- Demurrage/storage charges waiver

Provisional Release of Seized Warehoused Goods for Export:
The appeal concerned the rejection of the application for provisional release of seized warehoused goods for export. The appellant argued that the goods were intended for export, supported by export orders and part payment received before seizure. Despite conflicting test reports on the goods' classification, the appellant contended that there was no mala fide intent in declaring the goods. Reference was made to Foreign Trade Policy and Handbook of Procedure, emphasizing that goods warehoused for export should be released provisionally without prejudice to the revenue. The Tribunal noted that since the goods were meant for export, provisional release would not harm revenue interests. Considering the provisions of the Foreign Trade Policy, the Tribunal directed the release of the goods provisionally for export without duty payment, based on a bond for the goods' value.

Extension of Show Cause Notice Period:
The appellant raised concerns about the extension of the show cause notice period by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) without issuing a notice or providing an opportunity for the appellant to respond. It was argued that only the adjudicating authority could extend the notice period, rendering the extension by DRI as without jurisdiction. The Tribunal acknowledged the issue but focused solely on the release of goods for export, stating that the continued seizure was without jurisdiction, providing grounds for the unconditional release of goods for re-export.

Demurrage/Storage Charges Waiver:
The appellant highlighted the substantial demurrage and storage charges incurred due to the illegal seizure of goods, amounting to approximately Rs. 10 crores. The request for a waiver certificate for these charges was made under Regulation 6(1)(l) of Handling of Cargo Regulations. While the Tribunal did not directly address this issue in its decision, it granted the appellant the liberty to seek a waiver certificate for demurrage charges from the concerned authority, to be considered based on the case's circumstances and legal provisions.

The Tribunal's decision set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal and directing the provisional release of the warehoused goods for export on a bond without duty payment. The judgment emphasized the goods' intended export purpose, the lack of revenue prejudice, and the necessity to comply with Foreign Trade Policy provisions. The extension of the show cause notice period by DRI was noted as an issue but not the focus of the decision, which primarily revolved around the release of goods for export. The appellant's demurrage and storage charges waiver request was not directly addressed in the judgment but was acknowledged as a matter for the concerned authority to consider.

---