2025 (10) TMI 76

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... The petitioner is in the trade of import of textile fabric coated with plastics. They placed an order with a company at China for supply of textile fabric coated with plastics and the consignment also reached the Chennai Port. Further, the goods were taken to the SEZ Ware House. (ii) The goods were shipped under invoice dated 25.12.2024 and under Bill of Entry dated 09.1.2025. The petitioner also declared the value of the goods at USD 9043 and requested the first respondent - Department to release the goods. But, the petitioner was informed that the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence has undertaken an investigation after finding that that the classification of goods declared under the Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) was not correct ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....elligence since the investigation is pending and that the petitioner has to necessarily await adjudication and only thereafter, a decision can be taken for the re-export of goods. Ultimately, he sought for dismissal of this writ petition. 5. This Court has carefully considered the submissions of the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record. 6. In the case in hand, the complaint against the petitioner is that they had misclassified the goods under CTH 59039090 instead of classifying the goods under CTH 54075290, 58013690, 55162200, 60063200 and 60063400. 7. Section 110 of the Act deals with seizure of goods. Section 111 deals with confiscation of improperly imported goods. 8. The learned counse....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is Court the other views taken by different High Courts wherein a bank guarantee can be directed to be executed for some percentage of the customs duty that may be leviable on the redetermined value of the goods. 13. In the case in hand, the investigation has already been completed and based on the CRCL test report, it is alleged that there was a misclassification of the goods and that the goods were undervalued. This may result in confiscation under Section 111 of the Act and ultimately, the Adjudicating Authority can also give an option to the petitioner to pay the fine in lieu of confiscation. 14. The crux of the issue is as to whether the goods will have to remain in India or the petitioner can be permitted to re-export the goods ....