Customs dispute on restricted goods and SEZ authority admitted on questions of law, with forum objection left open.

Questions of law arising from a customs dispute were admitted without any merits determination, including whether the goods were restricted goods, whether confiscation and penalty were justified, and whether the Customs Department had authority in the SEZ context. The forum of appeal objection, including the contention that the matter lay to the Supreme Court on a valuation issue, was left open for final hearing. Pending further orders, the deposited redemption fine was directed to continue to remain invested, while the goods had already been re-exported.

---

---

Issues: The appeal was admitted on questions of law. The maintainability objection based on the forum of appeal was left open. Directions were issued for continued investment of the deposited redemption fine and for expeditious hearing.

Analysis: The appeal raised arguable questions on whether the goods were restricted goods, whether confiscation and penalty were attracted, and whether the Customs Department had authority to act in relation to goods in the SEZ context. At this stage, the Court did not decide those questions on merits and admitted the appeal. The contention that the appeal lay to the Supreme Court on a valuation issue was expressly kept open for consideration at the final hearing. Since the goods had already been re-exported and the redemption fine had been deposited, the Court directed that the deposited amount continue to remain invested pending further orders.

Conclusion: No substantive determination was made on the merits of the customs dispute. The appeal was admitted, the forum objection was left undecided, and the interim deposit direction was continued.

Final Conclusion: The proceeding remains pending for final adjudication on the admitted questions of law, with only interim and procedural directions having been issued.

Ratio Decidendi: Questions of law may be admitted without deciding the merits, and a forum or maintainability objection may be kept open for decision at the final hearing while interim protective directions are continued.

---