Madras High Court
Indra Ganthi Nadarajah vs The Commissioner Of Customs on 25 October, 2024
Author: Mohammed Shaffiq
Bench: Mohammed Shaffiq
W.P.(MD) No.25119 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 25.10.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
W.P.(MD) No.25119 of 2024
Indra Ganthi Nadarajah ... Petitioner
-vs-
1.The Commissioner of Customs,
No.1, Williams Road, Cantonment,
Trichy - 620 001.
2.The Joint/Additional Commissioner of Customs (Airport),
No.1, Williams Road,
Cantonment,
Trichy - 620 001.
3.The Assistant Commissioner of Customs (AIU),
Trichy Airport,
Trichy - 620 007.
4.The Superintendent of Customs,
Air Intelligence Unit,
Trichy Airport,
Trichy - 620 007. ... Respondents
____________
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.25119 of 2024
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for the
records relating to the Seizure Order made by the 4th respondent herein in
O.R.No.16/2024-AIU, Trichy, dated 14.03.2024, and quash the same as
illegal and consequently direct the respondents herein to permit the petitioner
to take back/Re-export the Gold Jewellery viz. Two Gold Chains and Six Gold
Bangles weighing 508.100 grams valued at Rs.30,74,005/- to Singapore,
covered by O.R.No.16/2024-AIU, Trichy, or to order for release and return of
the Two Gold Chains and Six Gold Bangles totally weighing 508.100 grams
covered by O.R.No.16/2024-AIU, Trichy, in so far as the petitioner is
concerned.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.K.Jayaraj
For Respondents : Mr.R.Nandha Kumar,
Senior Standing Counsel.
____________
Page 2 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.25119 of 2024
ORDER
Though this Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of a writ of
of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records challenging the Seizure
Order made by the 4th respondent, dated 14.03.2024, and further direct the
respondents to permit the petitioner to take back/re-export the Gold Jewellery
viz., Two Gold Chains and Six Gold Bangles, weighing 508.100 grams,
valued at Rs.30,74,005/- to Singapore or to order for release and return of the
said goods, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the
prayer would be confined to a mandamus for release of the goods.
2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that
show cause notice has already been issued to the petitioner pursuant to the
above seizure.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would then place reliance
upon the following judgments of this Court, wherein this Court has directed
the release of the goods seized, subject to complying with 50% of the duty
payable. The said judgments are as follows :
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1. W.P.No.1421 of 2011, dated 28.02.2011.
2.W.P.No.21194 of 2014, dated 08.10.2014
3.W.P.No.2968 of 2016, dated 29.02.2016
4.W.P.No.5148 of 2018, dated 20.04.2018
5.W.P.(MD) No.3125 of 2018, dated 21.02.2018
It is thus submitted that similar orders could be passed.
4. Before proceeding to examine the above contention, it is
relevant to extract Section 110 A of the Customs Act, 1962, which reads as
under :
''110A. Provisional release of goods, documents and
things seized pending adjudication.
- Any goods, documents or things seized under section
110, may, pending the order of the adjudicating officer, be
released to the owner on taking a bond from him in the proper
form with such security and conditions as the Commissioner of
Customs may require.''
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5. A reading of the above provision would suggest that the
provisional release of goods, documents and things seized, pending order of
adjudication, may be released to the owner by the adjudicating authority,
subject to taking a bond from him in proper form with such security and
conditions.
6. It thus appears that the provisional release of the goods and
attachment thereof is a discretion vested with the adjudicating authority and,
therefore, it is only appropriate that the authority, which is vested with the
discretion under the statute, exercise the same.
7. It is trite law that the power of judicial review under Article 226
of the Constitution of India though very wide, nevertheless, this Court would
neither exercise the discretion vested with the statutory authority nor direct
the manner in which the authority must exercise the discretion.
8. In view thereof, I am of the view that the petitioner may file an
application under Section 110A of the Customs Act,1962, if it is not actually
filed by now. If it is already filed, the same shall be considered by the
appropriate authority, taking into account the submissions that may be made
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
and also the judgments that may be relied upon by the petitioner and,
thereafter, the authority shall pass orders in accordance with law, after
hearing the petitioner, within a period of two weeks.
9. Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.
Consequently, the connected W.M.P.(MD) No.21370 of 2024 is closed.
25.10.2024
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
dixit
To:
1.The Commissioner of Customs,
No.1, Williams Road, Cantonment,
Trichy - 620 001.
2.The Joint/Additional Commissioner of Customs (Airport),
No.1, Williams Road,
Cantonment,
Trichy - 620 001.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3.The Assistant Commissioner of Customs (AIU),
Trichy Airport,
Trichy - 620 007.
4.The Superintendent of Customs,
Air Intelligence Unit,
Trichy Airport,
Trichy - 620 007.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
dixit
25.10.2024
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
