Madras High Court
M/S.St International vs The Principal Commissioner Of Customs ... on 25 November, 2025
Author: N. Anand Venkatesh
Bench: N. Anand Venkatesh
W.P.No.45725 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 25.11.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
W.P.No.45725 of 2025
AND
W.M.P.No.50959 of 2025
M/s.ST International
Rep. by its Proprietor Mr.Saurav Singh Tomar
Balaji Garden Ke Pass, EKTA Puri Colony
Guda Guidi Ka Naka, Kampoo
Gwalior 474 001 Madhya Pradesh .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Principal Commissioner of Customs (Chennai-III)
Preventive Commissionerate
Custom House, No.60, Rajaji Salai
Chennai - 600 001
2.The Additional Director General
Directorate of Revenue Intelligence
7th Floor, Drum Shaped Building
I.P.Bhawan, I.P.Estate
New Delhi - 110 002
3.The Special Officer, FTWZ
M/s.NDR Infrastructure Private Limited
Nandiambakkam, Ponneri Taluk
Chennai 600 120 .. Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for
issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents herein to permit the
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/11/2025 04:05:48 pm )
W.P.No.45725 of 2025
petitioner to re-export the goods viz., 83792.59 SQM of PVC coated fabrics
imported vide Bill of Entry No.7793330, dated 15.01.2025 and Bill of Lading
No.CSHMF241208074.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Subash
For 1st Respondent : Mr.M.Rajendran Raghavan
Senior Panel Counsel
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus
directing the respondents herein to permit the petitioner to re-export the goods
viz., 83792.59 SQM of PVC coated fabrics imported vide Bill of Entry
No.7793330, dated 15.01.2025 and Bill of Lading No.CSHMF241208074.
2. The case of the petitioner is that they imported PVC coated fabrics from
China. These goods were shipped from M/s.Shaoxing Kaiyi Textile Co. Ltd.,
China through invoice dated 28.12.2024 and filed warehousing Bill of Entry dated
15.01.2025 for SEZ import Z type and claimed for clearance of the goods.
3. The investigation authorities informed the petitioner that investigation is
being done and later, it was found that the goods declared under CTH 59031090
and the same has been classified under different CTH. Thereafter, the petitioner
was informed that the samples were taken and it has been sent to CRCL, New
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/11/2025 04:05:48 pm )
Delhi, for testing and thereafter, the goods have been detained. The goods were
seized under seizure memo dated 14.05.2025 stating that all the goods were found
to be misclassified on the basis of CRCL test report and it is further stated that the
CTH ascertained that the goods have been misclassified and different CTH have
been ascertained on the basis of the CRCL test report.
4. The petitioner was thereafter issued with summons for appearance before
the Investigating Officer at New Delhi. The petitioner also attended the enquiry.
The Intelligence Officer of DRI, informed that since the goods imported was
found to be misclassified, the goods are liable for confiscation under the
provisions of the Customs Act, 1962.
5. The grievance of the petitioner is that there is long delay in the release of
the goods and therefore, the petitioner is seeking for re-export of the goods.
However, no decision has been taken till date and it is under these circumstances,
the present writ petition came to be filed before this Court.
6. The issue involved in the present writ petition has already been dealt with
by this Court in W.P.No.33723 of 2025 dated 26.09.2025 and the relevant portions
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/11/2025 04:05:48 pm )
are extracted hereunder:
”7. Section 110 of the Act deals with seizure of goods. Section 111 deals
with confiscation of improperly imported goods.
8. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the case in hand,
at best, the goods may fall under Section 111(m) of the Act and that even in such
an event, Section 125 gives an option to pay the fine in lieu of confiscation, which
will be decided after adjudication.
9. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon the judgment
of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Siemens Ltd.Vs. Collector of Customs
[reported in 1999 (113) ELT 776].
10. By relying upon the said judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court, a
learned Single Judge of this Court passed an order in the case of Sankar Pandi
Vs. Union of India [reported in 2002 (141) ELT 635] wherein it was held that
the petitioner therein was entitled to re-export the articles in question and that it
was necessary for him to pay retention fine as imposed by the Authorities. This
Court ultimately held that at best, penalty could be imposed. This Court also
reduced the penalty and a direction was given to the petitioner therein to pay the
reduced penalty.
11. The learned counsel for the petitioner also brought to the notice of this
Court a Division Bench judgment of the Madurai Bench of this Court in Assistant
Commissioner of Customs (Imports), Tuticorin Vs. Mahadev Enterprises
[reported in 2023 (3) CENTAX 8] wherein this Court permitted the re-export of
goods after executing a bond to cover the value of the goods pending adjudication.
12. The learned counsel for the petitioner further brought to the notice of
this Court the other views taken by different High Courts wherein a bank
guarantee can be directed to be executed for some percentage of the customs duty
that may be leviable on the re-determined value of the goods.
13. In the case in hand, the investigation has already been completed and
based on the CRCL test report, it is alleged that there was a misclassification of
the goods and that the goods were undervalued. This may result in confiscation
under Section 111 of the Act and ultimately, the Adjudicating Authority can also
give an option to the petitioner to pay the fine in lieu of confiscation.
14. The crux of the issue is as to whether the goods will have to remain in
India or the petitioner can be permitted to re-export the goods to the supplier at
China since the supplier had also agreed to take back the goods.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/11/2025 04:05:48 pm )
15. The logical end to the adjudication proceedings will result in directing
the petitioner to pay the fine/penalty and differential duty. For this purpose, it is
not necessary to retain the goods in India. Therefore, to strike a balance,
considering the fact that the goods are lying in India from January 2025, certain
conditions can be imposed on the petitioner and on fulfilment of the conditions so
imposed, the petitioner can be permitted to re-export the goods. This view has
been taken by this Court and other High Courts while granting such a relief.
16. In the light of the above discussions, the writ petition is disposed of in
the following terms :
(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for the total value of
the differential duty payable by them;
(ii) The petitioner shall furnish a bank guarantee
equivalent to 20% of the re-determined value; and
(iii) On the petitioner fulfilling the above two conditions,
they shall be permitted to re-export the goods within a period of
12 days from the date of compliance of the above conditions as
imposed by this Court.
No costs. Consequently, the connected WMP is closed."
7. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of in the following
terms :
(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for the total value of the
differential duty payable by them;
(ii) The petitioner shall furnish a bank guarantee equivalent to
20% of the re-determined value; and
(iii) On the petitioner fulfilling the above two conditions, they
shall be permitted to re-export the goods within a period of twelve
(12) days from the date of compliance of the above conditions as
imposed by this Court.
No costs. Consequently, connected W.M.P. is closed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/11/2025 04:05:48 pm )
25.11.2025
rka (3/5)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/11/2025 04:05:48 pm )
N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.
rka
To
1.The Principal Commissioner of Customs (Chennai-III)
Preventive Commissionerate
Custom House, No.60, Rajaji Salai
Chennai - 600 001
2.The Additional Director General
Directorate of Revenue Intelligence
7th Floor, Drum Shaped Building
I.P.Bhawan, I.P.Estate
New Delhi - 110 002
3.The Special Officer, FTWZ
M/s.NDR Infrastructure Private Limited
Nandiambakkam, Ponneri Taluk
Chennai 600 120
25.11.2025
(3/5)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/11/2025 04:05:48 pm )
