TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 241X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se. Since, an order of the provisional release is appealable order, hence also, we see no reason to entertain this writ petition - Petition dismissed. - W.P.(C) 11586/2019 - - - Dated:- 30-1-2020 - THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. C.HARI SHANKAR Petitioner Through: Mrs. Anjali Jha Manish, Adv. with Mr. Priyadarshi Manish, Ms. Jasmeet Kaur, Advs. Respondents Through: Mr. Amit Bansal, Adv. with Mr. Aman Rewaria, Ms. Vipasha Mishra, Mr. Akhil Kulshreshtha, Advs. for R-1 2. Mr. Aditya Singla, Adv. for R-3/DRI. JUDGMENT D.N.PATEL, Chief Justice (Oral) 1. This writ petition has been preferred with the following prayers:- In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances it is therefore most respectfully prayed th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the value of the goods, after getting the report from the aforesaid institution, was found @ ₹ 22,28,700/-. The goods were seized on 31st August, 2019 under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962. 3. Respondent No.1 has filed counter affidavit and paragraphs 4 and 5 of the same reads as under:- 4. That regarding provisional release of the goods covered by the said shipping bill, respondent no. 3, had intimated that they have no objection if the seized goods of the exporter are provisionally released after safeguarding revenue on furnishing of suitable bank guarantee and bond in terms of Board's Circular No. 0l/2011-CDS dated 4.1.2011. 5. That, accordingly, the answering respondent, had given an option to the petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st the description and quality of goods covered under the said Shipping Bill. It is submitted that since the subject goods have been found to be overvalued, they can only be provisionally released after safeguarding the interest of revenue on fulfillment of the said conditions in terms of Board's Circular No. 01/2011 Cus. dated 04/01/2011. 5. In view of the aforesaid submissions, it is clear that the goods have already been ordered to be provisionally released upon certain conditions and, therefore, we see no reason to entertain this writ petition. 6. We may note that the Supreme Court has in its recent decision in State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Kay Pan Fragrance Pvt. Ltd. 2019(31) GSTL 385 (SC) has criticized the practice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
