TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 544
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on'ble Court be pleased to hold and declare: i. That freezing of the Petitioner No. 1's Current Account No. 22305442097 held with Respondent No. 3 Bank at its Centre Point Branch, S.V. Road, Santacruz (W), Mumbai branch is bad in law. ii. That freezing of the Petitioner No. 1's Current Account Nos.772205500055 held with Respondent No. 4 Bank at its Bylon House, D Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai, branch is in gross abuse of the powers under the Customs Act, 1962 and is also bad in law. iii. That freezing of the Petitioners No. 2's Current Account Nos.001105025038 held with Respondent No. 4 Bank at its Andheri West branch, Mumbai, is bad in law. (c) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction directing Respondents, their servants, subordinates and agents: i . To unfreeze the Petitioner No. 1's Current Account No. 22305442097 held with Respondent No. 3 Bank < Standard Chartered Bank> at its Centre Point Branch, S. V. Road, Santacruz (W), Mumbai branch; ii. To unfreeze the Petitioner No. 1's Current Account Nos.772205500055 held w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....w that such provisional attachment can be made when the final demand/liability is yet to be crystallised. 6. We therefore give the respondent the opportunity to file an affidavit explaining whether any proceedings are pending or not, given that the impugned orders are intra vires the provisions of Section 110(5) of the Customs Act. The affidavit must be filed and served by October 3, 2025, without seeking an extension of time. 7. Mr Kantawala submits that by way of an interim order, the bank accounts may be unfrozen. On instructions, he states that the amounts currently in the bank accounts (details are provided in paragraph 12 of the Petition) will not be touched and will be maintained. He, however, submits that on account of the freezing, the Petitioner is not able to accept remittances and from out of such remittances make payments locally as well as internationally. He submits that even after adjudication, if the Petitioner intends to file an Appeal, then only 10% of the determined amount is required to be deposited, and upon such deposit, an interim relief will operate. 8. Since the Petitioners have undertaken to maintain the amounts as are reflected....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....claration, gross undervaluation to evade applicable duties, and misuse of the IEC resulting in gross violations of the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. Hence, based on the collective evidence resulting from the investigations already conducted in the case, there are strong and cogent reasons to believe that the below mentioned account holder may utilise the funds to the detriment of revenue and on careful examination of the facts of the case it appears to be a fit case for exercise of power under Section 110(5) of the Customs Act, 1962, as there exists a proximate and live nexus in the exercise of such power for the purpose of protecting the interests of revenue 3. I am therefore, of the opinion that for the purpose of protecting the interest of revenue and preventing evasion of applicable import duties, it is necessary to provisionally attach the below mentioned Bank Account(s). Sr.No. Name of the Account holder PAN No. Bank Account Number Bank Name, Branch Address, IFSC 1 Di Lusso AAKFD8824F ---------------- ICICI Bank Andheri (West) Branch Ground Floor, Shop No. 1 to 3, Becta CHS Ltd, DLH Plaza, 54-A, S.V. Road, Andheri (Wes....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n of time to the person whose bank account is provisionally attached, before the expiry of the period so specified." (underlining is ours) 6. We find much substance in the contention as urged by the petitioners inasmuch as before the period of six months could expire, which expired on 7 January 2026, the Principal Commissioner of Customs or Commissioner of Customs has not passed any order extending the provisional attachment for a further period of six months and in the manner sub-section (5) of Section 110 would mandate; as fairly stated on behalf of learned Counsel for respondent - Revenue. 7. We are also not impressed on the submissions as urged on behalf of learned Counsel for Revenue that in view of the orders passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court dated 22 September 2025, no further action was required to be taken as a consequence as brought out by the said order, as there could be an automatic continuation of attachment. In our opinion, such reading of the order is not correct inasmuch as the said order cannot be read that the Court has dispensed with the effect of the provisions of law, namely of what is mandated by the proviso to Section 110(5) in the....