Provisional release of seized multi-function devices permitted on deposit of enhanced duty pending notification challenge and confiscation stay

Provisional release of seized multi-function devices amid dispute over notifications declaring such goods prohibited is addressed by reference to higher court directions. The stay on confiscation was recognized and the contested notifications are the subject of ongoing litigation; accordingly, authorities are directed to consider release of the goods provisionally on the condition that the importer pays or deposits the enhanced duty. On receipt of the enhanced duty, the goods are to be released within three weeks. The operative effect is that provisional release is permissible subject to payment of enhanced duty despite pendency of the notification challenge.

---

---

Issues:
1. Whether goods can be released by way of provisional release during the pendency of withholding.
2. Interpretation of notifications dated 01.04.2020 and 18.03.2021 regarding the importation of Multi-Function Devices.
3. Validity of the plea for Mandamus seeking provisional release of goods.

Analysis:
1. The petitioners imported Multi-Function Devices and sought provisional release during withholding. The main issue was whether these goods could be released provisionally under the Customs Act. The Senior Counsel for the petitioners argued that previous court decisions favored provisional release in similar cases.

2. The dispute centered around notifications dated 01.04.2020 and 18.03.2021. The Revenue argued that the goods were prohibited under the 01.04.2020 notification, making them ineligible for provisional release. However, the Senior Counsel cited Supreme Court orders allowing provisional release pending adjudication, despite the notifications.

3. The Court considered the conflicting arguments and previous judgments. It noted the Supreme Court's stay on confiscation and provisional release orders based on payment of enhanced duty. The Court emphasized that the plea for Mandamus could be granted independently of the notification disputes, following the precedent set by previous court decisions and the Supreme Court's confirmation.

4. Consequently, the Court directed the respondents to consider releasing the goods provisionally upon payment of enhanced duty within three weeks. Customs were instructed to quantify the duty promptly, and upon full payment, the goods were to be released. The order clarified that it did not hinder further Customs proceedings or adjudication. Additionally, it allowed for the consideration of waiver of demurrage charges upon application by the petitioners.

5. In conclusion, the Court disposed of the writ petitions, granting the plea for Mandamus for provisional release based on previous court decisions and the Supreme Court's confirmation. No costs were awarded, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.

---