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>Court Orders Release of Detained Turkish Apples with Bank Guarantee Pending Appeal on Import Restrictions.</h1> <h3>M/s. N.C. Alexander Versus Commissioner of Customs, Additional Commissioner of Customs (Group 1), Assistant/Deputy Commissioner of Customs (Group I)</h3> M/s. N.C. Alexander Versus Commissioner of Customs, Additional Commissioner of Customs (Group 1), Assistant/Deputy Commissioner of Customs (Group I) - TMI Issues involved:The issues involved in the judgment are the detention of imported goods by the respondents due to alleged non-compliance with CIF value regulations, the challenge to notification No.5 of 2023 regarding import value restrictions, and the direction for release of goods subject to execution of a Bank Guarantee for differential duty rates.Detention of Imported Goods:The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus to direct the respondents to assess and release imported goods, specifically apples from Turkey, covered under Bills of Entry pending clearance. The detention of goods was alleged to be contrary to the citizen's charter and the law laid down by the Court.Challenge to Notification No.5 of 2023:The respondent Department cited Notification No.5 of 2023, which prohibits import of goods at CIF value less than or equal to Rs. 50 per kg. The petitioner had imported apples at a lower rate, leading to the detention of the goods. The Division Bench of the Court had previously directed release of goods subject to execution of a Bank Guarantee for the differential duty amount.Release of Goods and Bank Guarantee:The Division Bench had directed the release of goods upon execution of a Bank Guarantee for the differential duty amount. The Court upheld this direction, ordering the respondents to release the goods within a week upon execution of the Bank Guarantee by the petitioner. The outcome was subject to the decision in Writ Appeal No.2626 of 2023.Conclusion:The Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the release of goods upon execution of the Bank Guarantee for the differential duty. If the challenged notification is upheld, the respondents are entitled to encash the Bank Guarantee. The Court also mentioned considering waiver of charges upon request by the petitioner in accordance with the law.
TaxTMI 