TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (4) TMI 135
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ns. The authorities felt that there were food safely issues. They also raised a valuation dispute. The importer was impressing upon the customs authorities to expeditiously release the goods, because they are perishable commodities. The customs authorities directed the importer to keep the goods in the public bonded warehouse maintained by Al-Hilai Storage, Tuticorin. Subsequently, it turned out that the food safety concerns raised by the customs authorities were rather baseless. In fact, the customs authorities had referred the matter to the jurisdictional laboratory twice. Two of the consignments comprising whole betel nuts were released in January 2012. Since the warehouse entity was directed to release them without charging any rent, the warehouse entity complied with the said oral direction. As regards the remaining three consignments, the Assistant Commissioner, Customs House, Tuticorin took the view that there was under valuation. Therefore, notice was issued to the importer vide notice dated 03.05.2012, calling upon the importer to explain as to why the price declared by them should not be rejected. Questioning the same, the importer filed W.P.(MD)No.6961 of 2012. The impor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e granted to the petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.6961 of 2012. It is to be noted that what was impugned in W.P.(MD)No.6961 of 2012 is only a notice calling upon the petitioner to give their objections and it by itself does not infringe the rights of the petitioner. In any event, the goods in question have already been released pursuant to the order passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A.(MD)No.548 of 2012. Therefore, W.P.(MD)No.6961 of 2012 can be closed. 8.The learned counsel for the importer would strongly contend that if any adverse order is passed by the customs authority, it would be patently hit by limitation. I leave the said issue open. W.P.(MD)No.6961 of 2012 is closed. 9.Now the question that arises for consideration is whether the direction given by the customs authority waiving the warehouse rent is valid or not. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner would contend that the warehousing entity cannot be made to suffer loss. He pointed out that the Hon'ble High Court has no where directed the customs authority to grant detention certificate waiving rent and that therefore the impugned communication on the face of it suffers from non-application of mind. Acc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that Al-Hilai Storage, Tuticorin is a customs cargo services provider. I have no hesitation to reject the initial contention urged by the learned senior counsel for warehouse entity. This is because the said entity had not only received and stored goods but eventually delivered the same to the importer in the months of January and November 2012. Therefore, it would be rather futile to claim that the said entity falls out side the statutory definition of customs cargo services provider. 13.Once it is noted that the warehousing entity is a customs cargo services provider, then they are bound to discharge the responsibilities cast on them under Clause 6 of the Handling of Cargo in Customs Areas Regulations, 2009 and fulfill the conditions in Clause 5 Handling of Cargo in Customs Areas Regulations, 2009, 14.Clauses 5(5) and 6 of the Handling of Cargo in Customs Areas Regulations, 2009 read as follows:- "5.Conditions to be fulfilled by Customs Cargo Service Provider: The Customs Cargo Service provider for custody of imported goods or export goods or export goods and for handling of such goods in a customs area shall fulfill the following conditions, namely:- (1) ............. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ity of imported and export goods under its custody; (j) be liable to pay duty on goods pilfered after entry thereof in the customs area; (k) be responsible for the secure transit of the goods from the said customs area to any other customs area at the same or any other customs station in accordance with the permission granted by the Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner of Customs; (l) subject to any other law for the time being in force, shall not charge any rent or demurrage on the goods seized or detained or confiscated by the Superintendent of Customs or Appraiser or Inspector of Customs or Preventive officer or examining officer, as the case may be; (m) dispose off in the manner specified and within a time limit of ninety days, the imported or export goods lying unclaimed, uncleared or abandoned: Provided that the period of ninety days may be extended by the Commissioner of Customs by such further period as may be allowed, on sufficient cause being shown for delay in the disposal; (n) not make any alteration in the entry or exit points or boundary wall without the permission of the Commissioner of Customs; (o) shall bear the cost of the customs officers p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in which Clause 6(1)(l) of the Handling of Cargo in Customs Areas Regulations, 2009, will come into play. I, therefore, sustain the order impugned in W.P.(MD)No.15985 of 2012 to the extent, it states that there will be no charging of rent or demurrage on the goods of the importer. 16.Of course, I will have to deal yet another contention of the learned senior counsel. He would fall back on some of the provision of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 to drive home his point that the warehousing entity is a bailee and that therefore, it has charge on the goods warehoused by them. This contention will have to be negatived in view of the categorical judgement of the Madras High Court in Balaji Dekors Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Commissionerate-III, Chennai, reported in 2017 (356) E.L.T. 2019 (Mad.). The learned Judge had categorically held that the relationship between the parties is not contractual but one that involves the implementation of a statutory regulation. When the regulation uses the expression "shall not charge any rent or demurrage", the warehousing entity is prohibited from charging any rent or demurrage during period of detention. Therefore, the order impugned in W.P.(MD)No.....