TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (1) TMI 817
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....#39; for the sake of convenience and clarity) calling upon the writ petitioner to give annual statement, balance sheet, remittance particulars etc., and the writ petitioner was called upon to appear before the officer concerned on 12.10.2021. This Court is informed that the writ petitioner appeared and produced the documents sought for. Thereafter as the consignment was not released, the writ petitioner sent two representations one dated 08.10.2021 and another dated 21.10.2021. Immediately thereafter, a seizure memo was issued on 26.10.2021 seizing the said consignment. Though no reasons have been given in the seizure memo, as the said consignment remains seized, writ petitioner has come before this Court with the captioned writ petitioner seeking release of said consignment vide said Bill of Entry. This Court issued notice on 23.12.2021 vide proceedings which reads as follows: 'Mr.Isaac Mohanlal, learned Senior Advocate instructed by the Counsel on record for the writ petitioner is before me. 2.Learned Senior Counsel submits that the captioned writ petition pertains to import of Black Pepper from Sri Lanka, a similar issue came up before this Court vide W.P. (MD)No.21469 o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....revert to this Court. Request acceded to. List tomorrow in the admission boar i.e., motion list. 3. List on 12.01.2022.' 2. The aforementioned proceedings are telltale qua the trajectory the matter has taken thus far. 3. Mr.Isaac Mohanlal, learned Senior Counsel instructed by Mr.Ragatheesh Kumar of M/s.Isaac Chambers (Law Firm) counsel on record for writ petitioner submits that a perusal of the counter-affidavit of the Revenue shows that the crux and gravamen of the issue is the allegation that the invoices qua said consignment have been overvalued so as to circumvent Minimum import price (MIP) of Rs. 500/- per kilogram as import of Black Pepper up to the value of Rs. 500/- per kilogram is prohibited vide notification No.21/2015-2020 dated 25.07.2018 issued by the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT). Advancing further arguments, learned Senior Counsel submitted that the issue as to provisional release of such Black Pepper which are under seizure i.e., said consignment on grounds of alleged over valuation of invoices (allegedly to circumvent import restrictions) is no longer res integra as provisional release of similar consignments which were seized on same grounds ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d. This is vide paragraph 38 (i) of the Single Judge's order. The importer carried the matter in appeal by way of intra-court appeal and a Hon'ble Division Bench vide its 22.12.2021 order modified the conditions imposed by learned Single Judge with regard to bank guarantee alone and said bond will suffice. This is vide paragraph 12 of the order of Hon'ble Division Bench. Paragraph 38 of order of Hon'ble Single Judge and paragraphs 12 to 14 of the order of Hon'ble Division Bench read as follows: Paragraph 38 of Single Judge's order: '38.In this context, the earlier order passed by the learned Judge referred to above in similar circumstances in M/s.Global Metro case, can very well be followed in the present case also. Accordingly, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of with the following order: (i)that the impugned order is set aside for the reasons discussed above and in view of the same, the respondent is hereby directed to pass orders for releasing the goods in question by way of provisional release of course by imposing the following conditions: that the petitioner shall pay the entire customs duty and also to execute a bank....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ation. The second reason is the question there was whether the consignment is a finished product i.e., finished leather or not and that was a case where Board Circular No.1/11 dated 04.01.2011 pertaining to 'Export' was dealt with. 7. Likewise, Unik Traders case is also clearly distinguishable on facts as that was a case pertaining to disputation qua 'Certificate of Country of Origin' (hereinafter 'Certificate of COO' for brevity). Moreover, Unik Traders case was carried to Hon'ble Supreme Court vide Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).7096/2019 with SLP(C) No. 7310/2019, SLP(C) No.7320/2019, SLP(C) No.7325/2019, SLP(C) No. 7332/2019 and the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 08.05.2019 sent the matter back to the High Court. The Single Judge thereafter decided the matter by an order dated 09.07.2019 in W.P(MD).No.15575 of 2019. It may not be necessary to dilate any further on facts or trajectory as Unik Traders case is clearly distinguishable on facts that being a case of disputation qua Certificate of COO for a consignment of Aracknut. The case on hand is on a entirely different footing. 8. In this regard, this Court reminds itself of the oft c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed counsel for the petitioner and Mr.K.Mohanamurali, learned Senior Panel Counsel for Customs Department/R1 to R4 and Mr.V.Sundareswaran, learned Senior Panel Counsel for the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI)/R5 & R6. 2. This Writ Petition challenges, by way of certiorarified mandamus, communication dated 25.05.2021, which has been issued by R4/Deputy Commissioner of Customs conveying the decision of the Chief Commissioner of Customs rejecting the petitioner's request for provisional release of consignments of import of black pepper that have been seized vide seizure memo dated 03.04.2021. They also seek a direction to the respondents to release the goods provisionally in terms of Section 110A of the Customs Act 1962 (in short 'Act') and issue Demurrage-cum- Detention Waiver Certificate for waiver of Demurrage and Container Detention Charges, in respect of the said goods in terms of Section 6(1)(l) of Handling of Cargo in Customs Areas Regulations 2009 read with Regulation 10(1)(l) of Sea Cargo Manifest and Transhipment Regulations, 2018. 3. The petitioner has imported five consignments vide Bill of Entry Nos. 3185706 dated 17.03.2021, 3212240 dated 19.03.20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he final stand of the DRI however, as conveyed vide communication dated 15.04.2021, paragraph 2 is categoric to the effect that 'this office does not have any objection for provisional release of the said goods'. They continue to state at paragraph 3 that 'It is herein requested that the said goods may be provisionally released as per the conditions stipulated under section 110 A of Customs Act, 1962.'. Thus the DRI before whom the investigation is stated to be on-going in regard to the valuation of the goods has expressed no objection for the release of the same. 8. Based on the communication of the DRI dated 15.04.2021, the Deputy Commissioner/R2 on 05.05.2021 communicates to the petitioner that the request for provisional release was rejected by the adjudicating authority. There is some confusion as to who is the adjudicating authority in this case, as in the communications of the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, she merely refers to the rejection of request by the 'adjudicating authority' without specifying who that authority is. Petitioner before me is also unable to clarify this issue. 9. The request of the petitioner before the Chief Commissioner (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pper in Sri Lanka as per their Bank accounts Statements. Shri Arshad Shajahan of M/s Global Metro has confirmed in his statement that the balance amount to be paid to the Overseas Supplier would never be paid. The content of statement was corroborated by the documents found during investigation. The above facts have been evidenced by the analysis of bank statements, email communications, e-way bills and the informal accounts maintained by relevant entities. 11. No details of incriminating material have been furnished that would substantiate the conclusion that the goods have been inflated in value. As far as the balance of the consideration remaining to be paid to the overseas supplier, this is a matter of negotiation between the supplier and the importer and would not concern the statutory authorities in the matter of valuation of the goods. There are also certain statements that appear to have been recorded in the course of the on-going investigation. All in all, the apprehensions expressed are, as of now, just apprehensions, and would have to be supported by tangible material in order to establish a prima facie case against the petitioner. 12. I am given to understand by t....