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>CESTAT Mumbai grants provisional release of seized imported goods without requiring BIS certificate submission</h1> <h3>Al Udai Exim LLP Versus Commissioner of Customs, Nagpur And Ramabors Exim LLP. Versus Commissioner of Customs, Nagpur</h3> CESTAT Mumbai allowed provisional release of seized imported goods without requiring BIS certificate submission. The case involved import of allegedly old ... Seeking provisional release of seized goods - import of goods without BIS - old and rejected goods - circular dated 20.10.2023 vis-à-vis the FTP 2023 - HELD THAT:- The jurisdictional Commissioner of Customs had sent the samples of the impugned goods for testing at the CRCL, Mumbai. In the test reports submitted by the said agency, with respect to the query, as to whether the same is ‘end cut, rejected CR strip in coil form or not’, it has been answered that the same could not be ascertained by them, and accordingly returned the sealed remnant samples to the department. By referring to the report submitted by CRCL, the Chartered Engineer had confirmed the estimated market rate of the impugned goods and also stated that the goods do not match / fall in the standard chemical composition range of any one specific grade of SS. On examination of the reports submitted by CRCL and the Chartered Engineer, it is found that no definitive inference was drawn, so as to conclude about the exact nature/composition of the product and the true market value of such products. The appellants should be entitled for provisional release of the goods in question, without insisting for submission of the BIS certificate. It is made clear that this order has been passed only in context with provisional release of the impugned goods. Appeal disposed off. Issues involved:1. Provisional release of seized imported goods without BIS certification.2. Interpretation of Ministry of Steel orders regarding steel imports.3. Effectiveness of circular dated 20.10.2023 on previously filed Bills of Entry.4. Discrepancies in testing reports and market value estimation of imported goods.Analysis:Issue 1: Provisional release of seized imported goods without BIS certificationThe appellants imported goods described as 'End Cut rejected CR Strips in coil form' without BIS certification. The Commissioner of Customs refused provisional release, citing non-compliance with the Steel and Steel Products (Quality Control) Order, 2020. The Tribunal held that the appellants should be granted provisional release without the BIS certificate, emphasizing that this decision only pertains to the provisional release and does not affect future departmental actions.Issue 2: Interpretation of Ministry of Steel orders regarding steel importsThe Ministry of Steel issued the 'Steel and Steel Products (Quality Control) Order, 2020,' mandating BIS compliance for steel imports. The Tribunal noted that the order specified certification for primary stainless steel products only, not for non-prime metals like those imported by the appellants. The circular dated 20.10.2023 expanded the requirement to all steel items, but the Tribunal ruled that this expansion should have prospective effect, not impacting imports made before the circular's issuance.Issue 3: Effectiveness of circular dated 20.10.2023 on previously filed Bills of EntryThe Tribunal referenced the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP), 2023, stating that policy changes apply prospectively from the notification date. Considering this, the Tribunal concluded that imports made before the circular's issuance should not be affected by the expanded BIS certification requirement, aligning with the principle of non-retrospectivity in policy changes.Issue 4: Discrepancies in testing reports and market value estimation of imported goodsThe CRCL and Chartered Engineer reports on the imported goods did not definitively determine the nature or market value. The CRCL's inability to ascertain if the goods were 'end cut, rejected CR strip in coil form' and the Engineer's confirmation that the goods did not match standard chemical compositions raised doubts. Consequently, the Tribunal ordered provisional release of the goods, emphasizing that this decision does not impact future departmental proceedings against the appellants.In conclusion, the Tribunal granted provisional release of the imported goods without BIS certification, considering the Ministry of Steel orders, circulars, and testing discrepancies. The decision was limited to provisional release and did not affect potential future actions by the Customs department.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
