2023 (9) TMI 585 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy - imported goods (black pepper) are prohibited goods or not - seeking provisional release of goods - HELD THAT:- The petitioner has an alternate remedy by way of an Appeal before the Appellate Commissioner. However, the Appellate Commissioner as a Statutory Authority, will be guided by Board in Circular No.35/2017-Cus., dated 16.08.2017 bearing reference F.No.394/13/2016-Cus(AS) which leaves no discretion with the Appellate Commissioner. The said circular prima facie is contrary to proviso to Section 151A of the Customs Act, 1962. Therefore, no useful purpose will be served by relegting the petitioner to work out the remedy before the Appellate Commissioner, unless, the Circular is itself put to testing before this Court.

Circulars of the Board are not binding on the Courts as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BOLPUR VERSUS M/S RATAN MELTING & WIRE INDUSTRIES [2008 (10) TMI 5 - SUPREME COURT].

There is no mandate that the goods shall be absolutely confiscated and vested with the Government. They can be released provisionally under Section 110-A of the Act pending adjudication - the Court is inclined to order a provisional release of the imported consignment of black pepper subject to petitioner furnishing suitable securities in the form of guarantee and subject to the meeting standards prescribed by the Food Safety Authority under the provisions of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. The petitioner shall also pay Customs duty provisionally at Rs. 500/- per kg. The value of Rs. 500/- per kg shall be provisional. The value may be enhanced if the imported consignment of black pepper is actually of higher value.

Petition disposed off.