2013 (3) TMI 7
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t the bank guarantee to the tune of 25% of the value of the goods i.e. Rs. 1,19,32,754/- with auto renewal clause and secondly that the party would give undertaking to the effect that the description of the goods/their quality/age/or other technical specifications/characteristics/ identity, etc., including analyses/test reports as mentioned in the show cause notice dated 4-7-2012 would not be challenged by them before the Adjudicating Authority. 2. Brief facts of the case as pleaded by the petitioner are that the petitioner-firm imported Plain Plastic Film and filed bill of entry dated 20-8-2011, which was seized by the respondent on 1-9-2011. The petitioner filed Civil Writ Petition No. 17968 of 2011 before this Court seeking release....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the description of the goods/their quality/age/or other technical specifications/characteristics/identity etc. including analyses/test reports as mentioned in the Show Cause Notice No. VIII-CUS/ICD/LDH/JCU/SCN/Om Udyog/ 107/12/2397-2401 dated 4-7-2012 will not be challenged by them, at any stage, during presenting their case before the Adjudicating Authority in the absence of the goods." 3. The petitioner feeling aggrieved against the imposition of the conditions (ii) and (iii) has approached this court on the ground that though it had already furnished the security and was ready to furnish the bond but harsh conditions of furnishing bank guarantee to the tune of 25% of the value of the goods had been imposed. Similarly condition No.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....goods under detention unless the affected party agrees to withdraw the challenge to the valuation. This will amount to denial of justice. Similarly, requirement of furnishing bank guarantee equal to 25% of the full market value of the seized goods is also, in the facts and circumstances of the case, arbitrary. Mere fact that condition of 10% of bank guarantee was upheld by this Court in T.L. Verma and M/s. Kundan Rice Mills cannot be justification to impose such conditions in each and every case. In those cases, this Court was satisfied that the importers had adopted fraudulent tactics which, prima facie, justified opinion for confiscation of goods. The said judgments cannot apply to every case of detention. Mere allegation of liability to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot justify power of confiscation and imposing of condition of furnishing of bank guarantee equal to 25% of the value of the goods. The said C.W.P. No. 13131 of 2011 judgment is not shown to be distinguishable in its applicability to the present case. 8. Accordingly, we allow this petition and direct immediate provisional release of goods on conditions mentioned in the order of provisional release except the requirement of declaration that the petitioner will not dispute the value of goods and will furnish bank guarantee. In respect of second consignment, the release will be on payment of customs duty as per valuation of the chartered engineer. It is, however, made clear that this order will not affect merits of the controversy to be a....