TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 535
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... shipment as specified vide Annexure-AM dated 31.01.2023. This investigation shall encompass the identification of all complicit officers, a full disclosure of the investigation's findings, and shall be conducted in adherence to due process. b. Issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction, requiring the Central Bureau of Investigation and Principal Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo Complex, Menzies Aviation Bobba Cargo Terminal 1, Kempegowda International Airport, Devanahalli, BENGALURU-560300, to extend full co-operation and provide all necessary documents, information, and logistical support to facilitate the investigation as reflected in Annexure-R dated 19.04.2021. c. Issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction, instructing the Respondents to compensate the Petitioner for the demonstrable financial losses compounded to time, legal costs and the emotional distress caused by their actions and omissions directly leading to the prolonged delay and obstruction in the release of the equipment. d. Issue directives and observations to the relevant government bodies, Respondent No. 14 specif....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e consignment. 5. On 04.10.2018, DHL raised a demand towards the customs duty payable. By then, according to the petitioner, the equipment had become obsolete. The petitioner therefore did not pay the customs duty demanded, declined to take delivery of the equipment and instead requested that it be returned to the seller. The petitioner also submitted several representations seeking, among other things, a CBI enquiry into the conduct of the Customs officials. It is in these circumstances that the present writ petition has been filed. 6. Having heard the petitioner, who appeared in person, and having perused the pleadings and the documents placed on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the foundation of the writ petition itself is misconceived. Though the petition is presented as one seeking investigation into alleged corruption by officials of the Customs Department, the material placed on record does not disclose any factual foundation which would justify such an extraordinary direction. 7. The grievance of the petitioner essentially arises out of the non-release of an imported consignment and the consequential loss allegedly suffered by him. Such a disput....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oms authorities was higher than the value declared in the shipping documents. Such a dispute regarding valuation is a matter governed by the provisions of the Customs Act and cannot, by itself, constitute evidence of corruption. 12. The records further indicate that ultimately the Customs authorities assessed the goods for customs duty on the basis of the valuation accepted by them and the courier agency raised the corresponding demand on 04.10.2018. The petitioner admittedly did not pay the customs duty so demanded. Instead, he chose not to take delivery of the goods on the ground that by then the mining equipment had become commercially obsolete and requested that the goods be returned to the foreign supplier. Therefore, the non-delivery of the goods after the customs assessment cannot be attributed to any continued inaction on the part of the Customs Department. The petitioner himself elected not to complete the process of clearance by paying the duty assessed. 13. Much emphasis was laid by the petitioner upon the allegation that there was an intentional delay between the arrival of the goods and the raising of the customs demand. Even assuming that there was some delay in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... issued only in exceptional cases where the material placed before the Court discloses circumstances necessitating an independent investigation in the interest of justice. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has repeatedly held that such directions cannot be issued routinely or merely because a litigant alleges misconduct. In the present case, no such exceptional circumstances are made out. 17. Insofar as the claim for compensation is concerned, the petitioner seeks damages on account of alleged financial loss, legal expenses and mental agony. Whether the petitioner suffered any loss, whether such loss was caused by any act or omission of the Customs authorities, whether the courier agency was negligent, whether the foreign supplier was responsible for the alleged mis-description or undervaluation of the goods, and whether the petitioner himself contributed to the situation by declining to pay the customs duty, are all disputed questions of fact requiring appreciation of evidence. Such issues cannot be satisfactorily adjudicated in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution. The appropriate remedy for adjudication of such claims is before the competent Civil Court or such other for....