Court Orders Quick Application for Release of Seized Sugar Due to Perishability; Decision Required in Ten Days.

The HC directed the petitioner to submit an application to the Adjudicating Officer within four days for the release of their seized sugar consignment, citing its perishable nature. The Adjudicating Officer must decide within ten days, adhering to principles of natural justice. The writ petition and any pending applications were disposed of without addressing the merits of the petitioner's claim.

---

---

Issues:
Petitioner seeks direction for release of seized consignment of sugar by Customs authorities.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a proprietorship firm with a valid trade license and GST registration, had a consignment of 700 bags of sugar seized by Customs authorities during transit. The petitioner approached the High Court seeking the release of the goods, citing their perishable nature. The consignment was intercepted for alleged violation of the Customs Act, and the petitioner filed a written statement and a prayer for release of goods under Section 110 (1-A) of the Act. The respondent argued that the petitioner had not applied for release before the Adjudicating Officer as required under Chapter-XIV, pointing to a circular issued by CBIC. The respondent also mentioned that the petitioner appeared before authorities and denied ownership of the goods, leading to certain disputes. The respondent emphasized the need for the petitioner to apply in the proper format before the Adjudicating Officer.

The Court directed the petitioner to make an application before the Adjudicating Officer within four days in the prescribed format for release of the perishable goods, supported by all necessary facts and documents as per Section 110 (1-A) of the Customs Act. The Adjudicating Officer was instructed to decide on the application within ten days, considering the perishable nature of the goods and following principles of natural justice. The Court clarified that its decision did not comment on the merits of the petitioner's claim, and the writ petition was disposed of accordingly. Any pending applications were also deemed disposed of by the Court's order.

---