Page 184 - ELT_15th August 2020_Vol 373_Part 4

518 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 373

2020 (373) E.L.T. 518 (Mad.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Rajiv Shakdher, J.
SRI VIJAYALAKSHMI LEATHERS
Versus
PR. COMMR. OF CUSTOMS-III (SIIB), CHENNAI
W.P. Nos. 43062-43070 of 2016 and W.M.P. Nos. 36923-36936 of 2016,
decided on 22-12-2016
Seizure - Provisional release of export goods - In terms of clause 2.2(c)
of C.B.E. & C. Customs Manual, provisional clearance ought to be the rule and
not an exception - C.B.E. & C. Circular No. 1/2011-Cus., dated 4-1-2011 also
permitting provisional release of export goods on execution of Bond of an
amount equivalent to value of goods along with furnishing appropriate securi-
ty in order to cover redemption fine and penalty - C.B.E. & C. Facility Circular
No. 1/2014, dated 2-1-2004 does not override conditions set out in Board’s circu-
lar - One of two reports of CLRI in assessee’s favour - Interminable detention
of goods neither enure to benefit of assessee nor to interest of State - Such de-
tention would lead to accumulation of demmurage and detention charges,
apart from loss of foreign exchange, which has to be best avoided, unless, as
goods where required to be absolutely confiscated - Condition for release of
goods onerous and to be relaxed - Assessee given option to seek release of sub-
ject goods/consignments by furnishing bank guarantee of nationalised bank
equivalent to 30% of export duty with other conditions unaltered - Section
110A of Customs Act, 1962. [2011 (269) E.L.T. A146 (S.C.), 2013 (289) E.L.T. 243
(Del.) relied on, 2016 (341) E.L.T. 65 (Mad.), 2012 (275) E.L.T. 148 (Bom.) distin-
guished]. [paras 16, 17, 17.1, 17.2, 18, 18.1, 19, 20]
Petition disposed of
CASES CITED
Aban Exim Pvt. Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner — 2015 (319) E.L.T. 430 (Del.)
— Referred .................................................................................................................................. [Paras 9, 14]
Apollo Cranes Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India
— 2012 (275) E.L.T. 148 (Bom.) — Distinguished ...................................................... [Paras 10.4, 15.3]
Commissioner v. Navshakti Industries Pvt. Ltd.
— 2011 (269) E.L.T. A146 (S.C.) — Relied on ..................................................... [Paras 9, 13.1, 15.3, 20]
Expos Leather Company v. Commissioner — Order dated 10-7-2009
in Appeal No. C/267/2009 by CESTAT, Chennai — Referred .............................................. [Para 9.2]
Expos Leather Company v. Commissioner — C.M.A. No. 2937 of 2010, decided on 19-11-2010
by Madras High Court — Referred ............................................................................................ [Para 9.4]
Malabar Diamond Gallery P. Ltd. v. Additional Director General, DRI
— 2016 (341) E.L.T. 65 (Mad.) — Distinguished .................................................. [Paras 10.4, 15, 15.2]
Vijayalakshmi Leathers v. Commissioner — 2000 (119) E.L.T. 656 (Tribunal)
— Referred .............................................................................................................................. [Paras 9.2, 9.3]
Zest Aviation Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India — 2013 (289) E.L.T. 243 (Del.)
— Relied on ....................................................................................................................... [Paras 9, 14, 15.3]
DEPARTMENTAL CLARIFICATIONS CITED
C.B.E. & C. Circular No. 1/2011-Cus., dated 4-1-2011 ..................... [Paras 5.7, 9.7, 10.3, 12, 17, 17.1, 18.1]
Commissioner of Customs, Chennai Facility Circular No. 1/2014-Cus.,
dated 2-1-2014 ...................................................................................................................... [Paras 10.3, 17]

EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th August 2020  184