Provisional release of imported soyabean allowed on safeguards, with port charge reconsideration permitted through representation.
Bombay HC addressed provisional release of an imported soyabean consignment after the food-safety authority stated on affidavit that the goods were not harmful for human consumption under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and rules. On that basis, release was permitted subject to safeguards, including a bank guarantee for differential duty, a bond with undertakings, cooperation in customs investigation, and use of the goods only for oil extraction with further FSSAI clearance for the manufactured product. The Court also allowed the importer to make a representation to the Chairman of the Mumbai Port Trust for reconsideration of demurrage and storage charges, to be decided expeditiously after hearing the importer.
Issues: (i) Whether the imported soyabean consignment should be provisionally released subject to conditions; (ii) whether the importer could be permitted to make a representation for reconsideration of demurrage and storage charges levied by the port authority.
Issue (i): Whether the imported soyabean consignment should be provisionally released subject to conditions.
Analysis: The Court recorded that the FSSAI had placed a clear affidavit stating that the soyabean sought to be cleared would not be harmful for human consumption or health under the requirements of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and the rules framed thereunder. The Court also noted the position of the Union of India, the GEAC and the Customs Department, and accepted the course suggested by the ASG. In that backdrop, the Court held that provisional release could be permitted, but only on safeguards including a bank guarantee for the differential duty, a bond with undertakings, cooperation in the customs investigation, and restriction of the use of the goods to extraction of oil with further FSSAI clearance for the manufactured product.
Conclusion: The issue was decided in favour of the importer, and provisional release was allowed subject to conditions.
Issue (ii): Whether the importer could be permitted to make a representation for reconsideration of demurrage and storage charges levied by the port authority.
Analysis: The Court noted that the goods had remained at the port during the dispute and that the petitioner's grievance regarding demurrage and storage charges did not require adjudication in the petition itself. In the peculiar facts, the Court accepted the request that the importer be allowed to approach the Chairman of the Mumbai Port Trust for a reasonable consideration of the chargeability, with a direction that such representation be decided after hearing the importer within a fixed time.
Conclusion: The issue was decided in favour of the importer to the limited extent that a representation was permitted and required to be decided expeditiously.
Final Conclusion: The petition was disposed of by permitting provisional release of the soyabean consignment on specified safeguards and by enabling the importer to seek reconsideration of port charges before the competent port authority, while keeping other contentions open.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the specialised food-safety authority records that the imported food item is not harmful for human consumption, the Court may permit provisional release of the goods on protective conditions, while leaving other regulatory and fiscal disputes open for further proceedings.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
