Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

6. The grievance of the Petitioner at the stage of filing W.P. (C) No. 3965 of 2017 was that the Respondents were not passing orders for provisional release of the goods against the live B/E or even the goods seized at the premises/godowns of the Petitioner. The said writ petition was first listed for hearing before this Court on 8th May 2017. Mr. Sanjeev Narula, learned Senior standing counsel for the Principal Commissioner of Customs while accepting notice on that date produced before the Court copy of an order dated 5th May 2017 passed by the Assistant Commissioner SIIB-Import granting provisional release of the goods imported against the live B/E subject to certain conditions. While acknowledging that such order had been passed, Ms. Anjali Jha Manish, learned counsel for the Petitioner, stated before the Court that those conditions were onerous and contrary to the settled legal position. At that stage, Mr Narula sought time to file a reply to the petition. The reply has since been filed both by the Customs and the DRI.

11. Mr. Sanjeev Narula, learned Senior standing counsel for the Customs Department referred to Section 110A of the Act which provides for provisional release of goods, documents and things seized pending adjudication. It reads as under:

"110A Provisional release of goods, documents and things seized pending adjuration:
Any goods, documents or things seized under Section 110, may, pending the order of the adjudicating authority, be released to the owner on taking a bond from him in the proper form with such security and conditions as the adjudicating authority may require."