Y!/:.Yrrtggn Tr?del9 v. 1. Union of lndia

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to invoke the jurisdiction vested by Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia to issue a Writ of Madamus or any other appropriate writ or Order or direction setting aside the Seizure [/emo dated 29-09-2025 issued by the 04th Respondent as being without jurisdiction and contrary to Foreign Trade Policy 2023 and consequently direct the 04th Respondent to forthwith release the petitioner's imported consignment of Multi-Functional Devices (MFD) of 107 units under Bill of Entry dated 22-09-2025, bearing No.4662591. IA NO :10 F 202s Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filecl in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 04th Respondent to forthwith provisionary rerease the goods i.e 107 Units of Murti-Function Devises (rvFDs) which have been seized under the Seizure Memo dated 2g-og-2025, pending disposar of the present writ petition, else the Petitioner would suffer irreparable loss and severe haldship. Counsel for the petitioner : SRI AKKApEDD| SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondents NoJ : SRI N.BHUJANGA RAO, Deputy Solicitor General of lndia COUNSEI fOr thE RESPONdENT NO.2IO4 :SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, Sr.SC FOR CBIC The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO W.P.No.30364 F20 ORDER: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Sant ktshy) Heard Mr.Akkapeddi Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. B. Mukherjee, leamed counsel representing Mr.N. Bhujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General of lndia, appearing for respondent No.l/Union of India and Mr.Dominci Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC, appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4. Perused the record.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed assailing the seizure memo, dated 29.09.2025, issued by the 4th respondent with the further request to forthwith release the imported consignment of the multifunctional devices ( 107 units) under Bill of Entry No.466259 l, dated 22.09.2025.

3. Similar writ petitions of identical nature have already been considered by this Bench wherein by way of an conditional interim order this Bench had permitted the release of seized goods subject to the petitioner/importer fulfilling certain conditions. 2 - 4- one such writ petition is w.p.No. 124g9 of 2025: where the goods irnported were seized by the customs authorities and by virtue of the interim order of this High courr, the Customs authorities were ordered to release on the following conditions. For convenience, we reproduce paragraph Nos.26 & 27 of the order passed in the aforesaid writ petition hereinunder: ?6. Tlrus. for all the aforesaid reasons. it is ordered that let the respondent authorities pass an order on the applicatior-r filed b_r, the petitioners fbr provisional release of the goods subiect to rhe conditions that: .fhe a) petitioner shall payldeposit the enhanccd dutr. amourrt. on reccipt of such enhanced duty amount paid b,r the pctiti.'ers. the goods in question shall be released within a period of four (04) rveeks thereafter. b) [;or payment of such duty. quantification shall be nrade b' the customs forthwith within one (01) w.eek fiom the dare ol- receipt ol'a copy of this order. on receipt of such quantiricati... the par,ment shall be immediatery rnade by the petiti.ners and .n receipt ol'the payment in entirety, the goods shall be relcasecl as indicatcd above at the outer limit of four (04) rveeks. c) tt is made clear that this order will not stand in the rva1. l.r Customs Department to go ahead w'ith thc further proceedings including the ad.iudication in the manner known to lau. d) lt is lurther made clear that so far as the condition ol- the petitionc'r that denrrnurage char_qes till date. lor the _,roods hc -2 \- 3 considered for waiver, in this regard, if any application is filed b1' the petitioners seeking such a waiver ol-dentnrurage charges, the same shall be considered and decided b1, the respondents objectively.

27.|n addition, the petitioners are also directcd to providc a bank guarantee worth l0 percent of the total price of the goods imported by them. Further. it is also ordered that in the event if the petitioners upon release of the goods provisionally make and sell the supply to their customers, details of the customers that of relevant price and details of the respective transactions shall be maintained and made available to the respondent authorities from time to time.

5. Pursuant to the said interim direction and upon the petitioner therein fulfilling the conditions stipulated by the High Court, the seized goods were released to the petitioner. -fhe said order of releasing of the goods was subjected to challenge before the Hon'ble Supreme Court; where the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP.No.42808124, datedl5.0l.2025, has refused to interfere with the order passed by this Bench.

6. However, as regards the proceedings befbre the adjudicating authority is concerned, the Hon'ble Supreme Court permitted the adjudicating authority to proceed and decide the same strictly in accordance with law. The petitioner is also helcl entitled fbr participarion in the adjudicating proceedings. 7 - Pursuanr ro the disposal of the slp, this Courl has disposed of all such writ petitions whereby the goods were released and the proceedings were pending before the adjudicating authority. 8- Similar nature of facts are also there in the instant case also where the stage at this juncture is only the seizure memo and prayer is also onll lbr an interim release of the seized goods.

9. Irr the factual matrix narrated in the preceding paragraphs, we are of the considered opinion that the instant writ petition also therefbre cern be disposed of at the admission stage itself. Reserving the right of'the adjudicating authority to take appropriate decision in the proceedings after permitting the petitioner to represent befbre the adiudicating authority:

10. T'hus, fbr all the aforesaid reasons, it is orderecl that ret the respondent ,uthorities pass an order on the applicatio, filed by the petitioners [br provisional release of the goods subject to the conditions tliat: a) The petitioner shall payldeposit the enhanced duty amount. On receipt of such enhanced duty amount paid by the petitioners, the goods in question shall be released within a period of four (04) weeks thereafter. b) For payment of such duty, quantification shall be made by the Customs forthwith within one (01)'week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order' On receipt of such quantification, the payment shall be immediately made by the petitioners and on receipt of thepaymentinentirety,thegoodsshallbereleasedas indicated above at the outer limit of four (04) weeks. c) It is made clear that this order will not stand in the way for Customs Department to go ahead with the furtherproceedingsincludingtheadjudicationinthe manner known to law. d)ItisfurthermadeclearthatSof-araSthe conditionofthepetitionerthatdemmuragechargestill date,forthegoodsbeconsideredlorwaiver,inthis regard, if any- ppplication is filed by the petitioners .r^-- I seekine such a waiver of dernmurage charges' the same shatlbeconsideredanddecidedbytherespondents . . I objectivelY. 1 1. In addition, the petitioners are also directed to provide a bank guarantee worth 10 percent of the total price of the goods imported : I by them. Further, it is also ordered that in thc event if the petitioners upon release of the goods provisionally nrakes and sell the supply to their customers, details of the custorners that of relevant price and details of the respective transactions shall be maintained and made available to the respondent authorities from trrne to tltr)e. I2. Needless to mention that the adjudicating authority in the process ol' deciding the same u,ould not be in any manner inf'luenced b,v.- the order of conditional release orderecl by this Court. -fhe authrlrity slrall decide the same considering the objections and contentions that would be raised on either side.

13. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. No order as ro costs. closed Miscellaneous applications pending, if an,v, shall stand That Rule Nisi has been made absolute as above. Witness THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH, on this Tuesday, The seventh Day of october Two Thousand And rwenty Five //TRUE COPY// SD/-A, JAYASREE ISANT REGISTRAR OFFICER To, 1 The Secretary, Department of Revenue, Union Govt. of lndia, New Delhi. , lVinistry of Finance, 2 3 The Joint commissioner of customs (lmports), GST Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad -. 500004. The Deputy commissioner of customs rcD, Timmapur - 509325, Telangana

4. The Superintendent of customs (lcD- Timmapur), Hyderabad customs Commissionerate, Hyderabad, Tdlangana

5. One CC to SRI AKKAPEDDI SRIN|VAS, Advocate. [OPUC] 6. One CC to SRI N.BHUJANGA RAO, Deputy/Additional Solicitor General of lndia, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. IOPUC] Two CD Copies 7 BSK LS a I HIGH COURT .t i DATED:0711012025 J 1 ORDER WP.No.30364 of 2025 1 nt: ST4 14: k(. ?) 3 1B }l[\l Im t * Df '; 11^ 1,'',r(' 1') a ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS a