Customs - Supreme Court Orders Provisional Release of Goods Detained in 2001
AN assessee had been regularly importing ‘copper concentrate' as raw material for its manufacture of copper cathodes, copper sulphate etc. But in early 2001, the DRI felt that the goods are not concentrates of copper and they were hazardous. The Commissioner promptly confiscated the goods and imposed the ‘regulation penalties and interest'.
On appeal, the Tribunal set aside the orders of the Commissioner and held that the goods are not proved as hazardous and ordered their release treating them as copper concentrate.[]
Revenue does not keep quiet in such cases. It took the matter to the Supreme Court. After several adjournments, the case came up on 10.12.2012, on an IA by the respondent assesse. When the IA was taken up for consideration, the Senior Counsel for Revenue brought to the notice of the Court certain provisions of the Customs Manual, which in fact, provide for release and clearance of goods.
The Supreme Court observed,
In the guidelines for expeditious clearance/provisional release, paragraph 2.2. has been brought to our notice, of which sub-paragraph (c) is relevant for our purpose. The same is, accordingly, extracted hereinbelow:-
"2.2.(c) But for certain exceptional categories, in any dispute case pending investigation wherever importer or exporter is willing, he should be allowed provisional clearance of the goods by furnishing a bond for full value of the goods supported by adequate bank guarantee as may be determined by the proper officer. The value of bank guarantee shall not exceed twice the amount of duty. The provisional clearance should be allowed as a rule and not as an exception. Provisional release may not be restored to in the cases mentioned below but here too option for storage in warehouses under Section 49 of the Customs Act, 1962 should be provided to the importers (goods can be allowed entry into the country only after the laid down quality standards etc. are satisfied):
(i) Goods prohibited for import/export;
(ii) Imports for complying with the specifications/conditions/requirements of various Orders/Acts (e.g. Livestock Importation Act, 1898, Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, etc.); and
(iii) Where gross fraudulent practices are noticed and release of the goods may seriously jeopardize further investigations as also interests of the revenue ."
The said provision provides for provisional release of the goods detained.
The Supreme Court directed the Customs Authorities, to release the goods in question to the respondents, subject to compliance with the provisions of Chapter 15 of the Customs Manual, 2011. The representatives of the respondents will be at liberty to appear before the Commissioner of Customs, on 22nd December, 2012, at 10.30 A.M., for working out this order.
There may be two problems:
1. Now they have a Customs Manual 2012.
2. 22nd December 2012 was a holiday being Saturday.
The goods were detained in 2001. Tribunal ordered release in 2005. Now, provisional release is ordered after more than seven years. Where are/were the goods for the last 11 years? Who pays for the storage? And will the goods be still useful after all these years?
(See )