TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
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>High Court Orders Release of Vessel in Goods Dispute</h1> <h3>FSL-10 Pte Ltd. Through Poa Mr. Anil Shamrao Jadhav & 1 other (s) Versus Commissioner Of Customs & 1 other (s)</h3> The High Court ordered the release of the vessel owned by the writ applicants, which was detained due to a dispute over the nature of the goods onboard. ... Release of vessel - Classification of imported goods - GTL Light Paraffin - The goods have already been released of a bond executed by the importer. - whether the subject goods is in the form of Liquid Paraffin or Light Diesel Oil? - report of the CRCL, rejected by DRI - HELD THAT:- The writ applicants are the owners of the vessel. It is noted that the goods have already been released. As two reports now on record of two different laboratories, further detention of the vessel, need not be allowed. At least, the vessel needs to be released on the writ applicant furnishing an appropriate undertaking to the Commissioner (Customs) to the effect that the writ applicants shall cooperate in the inquiry till the last. The inquiry has otherwise also to proceed further as the importer has also executed a bond while getting the good released and has already furnished a bank guarantee of the amount equivalent to the value of the goods. This writ application is disposed off directing the Commissioner (Customs), Kandla, to release the vessel after obtaining the undertaking. Issues:1. Determination of the nature of subject goods - 'Liquid Paraffin' or 'Light Diesel Oil'2. Detention of vessel and release of goods3. Dispute between Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) and Central Revenue Control Laboratory (CRCL) reportsAnalysis:1. The primary issue in this case is the nature of the subject goods, whether it is 'Liquid Paraffin' as claimed by the writ applicants or 'Light Diesel Oil' as asserted by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI). The controversy arose when samples were sent to the Central Revenue Control Laboratory for analysis. The CRCL report concluded that the samples were 'Liquid Paraffin' and met the requirements of Paraffinic Diesel Fuel, distinct from Automotive Diesel Fuel or Light Diesel Oil.2. The vessel owned by the writ applicants was detained in connection with this dispute. However, the goods had already been released upon the importer furnishing a bank guarantee equivalent to the goods' value. The High Court, considering the conflicting reports from CRCL and DRI, decided to release the vessel. The court directed the writ applicants to provide an undertaking to cooperate in the inquiry, as the investigation needed to proceed further due to the bond executed by the importer.3. Despite the CRCL report favoring the goods being 'Liquid Paraffin,' the DRI expressed reservations and intended to pursue further inquiry. The DRI highlighted that the CRCL report did not cover all parameters of the Indian Standard, prompting them to seek additional investigation. The High Court acknowledged the DRI's concerns and allowed them to continue their inquiry independently while ordering the release of the vessel under the condition of the writ applicants' cooperation.In conclusion, the High Court's judgment resolved the immediate issue of releasing the vessel while allowing the DRI to conduct further investigations regarding the nature of the subject goods. The conflicting reports from CRCL and DRI necessitated a balanced approach to ensure compliance with the law and the continuation of the inquiry process.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
