TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 662
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d food products including flavoured syrups, etc. of a French brand called 'Monin'. 4. The Petitioner further submits that they had never faced problems in imports, however, some time in June, 2025 the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Delhi (hereinafter, 'DRI') started an investigation and conducted certain searches and issued a seizure memo in respect of certain shipments. The said shipments are now being detained and are not being released. 5. On 22nd July, 2025, when this matter was heard, it was submitted by Mr. Amar Dave, ld. Senior Counsel for the Petitioner that considering that the detained shipments contain perishable food products, the Petitioner had already made a representation for provisional release of these goods. Further, a sum of Rs. 3.75 crores has already been paid by the Petitioner as a voluntary payment. However, despite the same, the provisional release application had not been considered and disposed of. 6. Mr. Amar Dave, ld. Senior Counsel on the said date further submitted that the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have given a report to the Respondent No. 3 - Customs Authorities, Mumbai and the said authority now has to take a decision on the provisional....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t to be executed by the Petitioner is to the tune of Rs. 43,21,86,391/- and a bank guarantee/security deposit of a sum of Rs.21 crores. 10. This provisional release order was, thereafter, challenged by the Petitioner by way of an application being CM APPL. 45575/2025. The said application was filed by the Petitioner seeking to amend the present writ petition and challenge the said provisional release order dated 24th July, 2025. The same was allowed and disposed of vide order dated 29th July, 2025. The submission on behalf of the Petitioner on the said date was that, considering the total value of goods being Rs. 43 crores, the condition imposing a requirement to furnish a bank guarantee of Rs. 21 crores is an onerous condition. In addition, one of the grievances of the Petitioner was that the cash deposit of Rs.3.75 crores which was made by the Petitioner under protest was also not considered. Under these circumstances, the Court vide order dated 29th July, 2025 had directed the Customs Department to seek instructions in the matter. 11. Today, Mr. Singla, ld. Senior Standing Counsel and Mr. Ojha, ld. Senior Standing Counsel have made their submissions. It is the submission o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ver the following: i. the entire amount of duty/differential duty leviable on the seized goods being provisionally released; ii. amount of fine that may be levied in lieu of confiscation under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 at the time of adjudication of the case. While securing the same, the competent authority shall take into account the nature of the seized goods, the duty and charges payable on the said goods, their market price and the estimated margin of profit; iii. amount of penalties that may be levied under the Customs Act, 1962, as applicable, at the time of adjudication of the case. 2.3. Depending on the specific nature of a case, the competent authority may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, increase or decrease the amount of security deposit as indicated above." 16. A perusal of the above Circular would show that in order to maintain consistency, the Customs Department is required to seek a bond for the full estimated value of the goods. In addition, bank guarantee/security deposit is to be sought for three elements, namely, the entire amount of differential duty, amount of fine and the amount of penalty. 17. Howeve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h 2 of the Circular No. 35/2017-Customs was declared void by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. Paragraph 2 of the said Circular to the extent it curtails the decision of the Adjudicating Authority has been set aside in M/s Shanus Impex v. Union of India and Ors., (2024) 15 Centax 129 (Del.) Even in the impugned provisional release order, paragraph 2 of the same circular is relied upon to justify the said order. Thus, the discretion for imposition of conditions cannot be taken away. The relevant portion of the provisional release order is extracted below: "7. Further, it has been communicated by DRI/HQ/New Delhi, vide letter F. No. DRI/MZU/F/Int-20/2025/1556-1557 dated 21.07.2025, provisional release of the goods seized under the aforesaid Seizure Memorandum dated 01.07.2025 may be considered in terms of in terms of the Section 110AA of the Customs Act, 1962 read with the Notification no 28/2022-Customs dated 31.03.2025, subject to the provisions of section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Board's Circular No. 35/2017, dated 16.08.2017, by taking suitable Bond and Bank Guarantee." 19. The question as to whether there is under-declaration or not is yet to be ....