Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Sanwaria Trends Pvt. Ltd. And Anr vs Union Of India And Ors on 4 February, 2026

Author: G. S. Kulkarni

Bench: G. S. Kulkarni

  2026:BHC-AS:6417-DB                                                                                            6.WP.5692.2025.DOC



                                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                           CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                                             WRIT PETITION NO.5692 OF 2025

                                  1. Sanwaria Trendz Private Limited
                                  2. Hitesh Mangubhai Rathod                                                     Petitioners
                                                versus
                                  1. Union of India
                                  2. Commissioner of Customs (Nhava Sheva-II),
                                  3. Deputy Commissioner of Customs (Nhava Sheva-II),
                                  4. Asstt.Commissioner of Customs (Nhava Sheva-II),
                                  5. Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs
                                  6. Directorate General of Analytics and
                                  Risk Management (DGARM)                                                        Respondents

                                                                              _______
                                  Mr.Saakshat Pelekar for Petitioner.
                                  Ms.Raju R.Thakker with Mr.Priyanshu Doshi for Respondents.
                                                                              _______

                                                                      CORAM:       G. S. KULKARNI &
                                                                                   AARTI SATHE, JJ.
                                                                      DATE:        4th February 2026

                                  P.C.

1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying for following substantive reliefs :

"a. that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus, or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby directing Respondent no.5 to forthwith remove the `active alert' inserted against Petitioner no.1's Importer- Export Code No.5214015348, flagging the said Importer-Exporter Code as `Risky Exporter';
b. that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus, or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby directing Respondent no.4 to forthwith Digitally signed by remove the suspension of Duty Drawback and RoSCTL against MANISH MANISH SURESHRAO SURESHRAO THATTE Petitioner no.1's Importer-Exporter Code No.5214015348."
THATTE      Date: 2026.02.07
            15:35:02 +0530




                                                                          Page 1 of 2
                                  M.S.Thatte


                                       ::: Uploaded on - 07/02/2026                          ::: Downloaded on - 13/02/2026 21:42:55 :::
                                                                              6.WP.5692.2025.DOC



2. At the outset the learned counsel for Revenue states that she has received instructions in the form of an e-mail addressed to her dated 3 rd February 2026 whereby the concerned Department (Drawback Section, NS-II, JNCH, Nhava Sheva) informs that Drawback Scroll No.163707, dated 26 th September 2025 and ROSCTL Scroll No.163739 dated 26 th September 2025 has been generated in respect of Shipping Bill No.3932328, dated 11th September 2024.
3. In this view of the matter, as the active alert has been withdrawn, further adjudication of the present petition is not called for. Copy of e-mail is taken on record and marked "X" for identification.
4. Needless to state that except what has been stated above, we have not gone into any other contentions as raised in the petition.
5. In this view of the matter, due to removal of suspension of Duty Drawback and RoSCTL against Petitioner no.1's Importer-Exporter Code No.5214015348, all consequential benefits would become entitled to the Petitioners.
6. Petition is disposed of. No costs.
             (AARTI SATHE, J.)                       (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)




                                       Page 2 of 2
M.S.Thatte


     ::: Uploaded on - 07/02/2026                        ::: Downloaded on - 13/02/2026 21:42:55 :::