2022 (6) TMI 1189 - HC - Customs

Appeal dismissed; re-export of perishable unflavored supari allowed on full-value bond, investigation and rights preserved

HC dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Single Judge's direction permitting the respondent to re-export perishable unflavored supari, provided the ... Seeking permission to re-export the goods - Unflavored Supari (Betelnut Product) - seeking issuance of Detention Certificate for waiver of demurrage and container detention charges - HELD THAT:- The respondent has no objection to submit himself for enquiry. As a matter of fact the investigation is going on and the respondent has already appeared before the investigation agency once. This Court is unable to find any reason to interfere with the order of learned Single Judge, which gives only simple direction to the appellants to complete the adjudication process one way or the other with an option to the respondent to re-export the goods back to the place from where the goods were imported. As pointed out by this Court earlier, this Court do not find any merit in the grievance expressed by learned counsel for the appellants. In the present context, the respondent has given an undertaking that they will execute a bond to cover the value of the goods, pending adjudication, if, the appellants permit him to re-export the goods taking into consideration the fact that goods are perishable and there is possibility that the value of goods will be reduced by efflux of time. It will be in the interest of both to permit the respondent to re-export the goods subject to reasonable conditions to protect the interest of the Revenue. The appellants are directed to permit the respondent to exercise their option as per the order of learned Single Judge upon the respondent executing a bond to the full value of the goods that is sought to be re-exported and this order or direction is issued without prejudice to the rights or authority of the appellants to proceed further with the investigation and to impose or collect whatever charges that may be permissible under law - appeal dismissed. Issues:Challenge to order of learned Single Judge regarding re-export of goods, classification of goods under Chapter VIII, imposition of duty, detention of goods, issuance of Detention Certificate.Analysis:1. The respondent filed a writ petition seeking a Writ of Mandamus to re-export goods detained by the authorities, namely Unflavored Supari (Betelnut Product), and to issue a Detention Certificate for waiver of demurrage and container detention charges. The respondent imported the goods, but the authorities sought to levy duty under a different classification, leading to a representation for re-export to avoid tax assessment under Chapter VIII.2. The learned Single Judge, following a previous decision, granted the trader the option to re-export the goods if they were prohibited, with the authorities permitted to impose penalties if necessary. The appellants challenged this order, arguing against the differentiation from a previous case. However, the Court found no justification for the appellants' stance, noting the protection available to the authorities and the lack of revenue loss in the present case.3. Upon deeper analysis, the Court found no merit in the grounds raised by the appellants. The facts revealed that the respondent imported Betelnut Products, seeking re-export due to inability to afford tax under the proposed classification. The respondent's efforts aimed at convincing the authorities of the incorrect tax classification or to re-export the goods to mitigate losses, leading to the writ petition.4. The Court upheld the order of the learned Single Judge, emphasizing the authority of the appellants to impose penalties or charges as necessary. The appellants' argument regarding further liability assessment or statutory remedies was addressed, with ongoing investigations and the respondent's cooperation noted.5. Considering the perishable nature of the goods and the possibility of reduced value over time, the Court directed the appellants to permit re-export upon the respondent executing a bond covering the goods' value. This direction was issued without prejudice to the appellants' authority to continue investigations and impose lawful charges. The appeal was dismissed, and no costs were awarded, concluding the matter.This detailed analysis covers the issues raised in the judgment comprehensively, outlining the legal arguments, court's findings, and the final directives given by the Court.