M/s. Copy Tech Solutions v. 1. The Commissioner of Customs

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Wnf OF MANDAT\4US declaring the action of the Respondent No.1 to 4 in seizing the various models of Second-hand Highly Specialized Equipment, Digital Multifunction Print and Copying Machines, imported by the Petitioner i-e - Mis. Copy Tech Solutions, vide'ieizure Memo dated 0311212025 and refusal to allow the clearance of the subject goods covered by vide Bill of Entry No.5904376 dated 2St11tZO25 (117) units [ayment of applicable total duties on the declared value as arbitrary, unreasonable, contrary to the provisiols 9f the Customs Act 1962,ile lmport-Hxport Policy 2023, Meiiy Notification S.O. No.2844(E) dated- 011O712021 by duly setting asld" the seizure memo and panchanama and Supardnama oi.oslt 2t2o2s or +tn respondent is in violation of petitioners fundamental rights guaranteed by Articte 14, 19(1Xg) and 300A of the Constitution of lndia and to direct the Respondent to release the subject goods forthwith on applicable duty by granting waiver of demurrage charges. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 1 to 4 respondent to provisionally retease various models of Second-hand Highly Specializecl Equipment, Digital Multifunction Print and Copying Machines, imported by the Petitioner i.e tr//s. Copy Tech Solutions, and which have been submitted for clearance before the Respondents 1' to 4 vide Bill of Entry No.5904376 datecl 251111202s (117) Units, on payment of appticable duty. counsel for the Petitioner: SRt MoHD. ANWAR ALI REPRESENTING FoR SRI MALLA REDDY GADIPALLY counsel for the Respondents: SRI SASHANK DUNDU REPRESENTING FoR M/s. DOMtNtC FERNANDES (SR. SC for CB|C) The Court made the following: ORDER I IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT YDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO WRIT PE'IITION No.37952 OF 2025 Date: 10.12.2025 lletween: M/s.Copy Tech Solutions, rep.by its Proprietor Mrs.Rashmi Chhajer W/o.Purnachander Balne. The Comrnissioner of Custouts (Hyderabad II) Imports, Basheer Bagh. Hyderabad and others. And petitioner ... Respondents ORDER' (per Hon'ble Sri,lustice P.Sam Koshy) Heard Mr.Mohd.Anwar Ali, learned counsel representing Mr.Matla Reddy Gadipally, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Sashank Dundu, learned Counsel representing Mr.Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC, appearing for respondents and perused the record.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed assailing the seizure memo, dated 03.12.2025, issued by the 4'h respondent with further request to forthwith release the imported consignment of the / ,/ 2 multifunctional devices (117 units) under Bill of Entry No.59043 7 6. dated 25.1 1 .2025 .

3. Similar writ petitions of identical nature have already been considered by this Bench wherein by way of a conditional interim order this Bench had permitted the release of seizecl goods subject to the petitioner/importer fulfilling certain conditions

4. One such writ petition is W.P.No.12489 ol 2025; where the goods imported were seized by the Customs authorities and by virtue of the interim order of this Fligh Court, 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 hereinundcr

26. l'hus. for all the aforesaid reasons. it is ordereil tliat let the respondent authorities pass an order on the applicirtion fite<l by the petitioners for provisional release of the goods suhject to the conditions that: :r) The petitioner shall payldeposit the enhance<i 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 (0r) week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such quantffication, I i T ? I -\ ) 3 the payment shall be immediately made by the petitioners and on receipt of the payment in entirety, the goods shall be released as 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 funher proceedings including the adjudication in the manner known to law' d) It is further made clear that so far as the condition of the petitioner that demmurage charges till date. for the goods be considered for waiver, in this regard, if any application is filed by the petitioners seeking such a waiver of demmurage charges, the same shall be considered and decided by the respondents objectively.

27.lnaddition, the petitioners are also directed to provide a bank gllarantee 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 suppty to their customers, details of the customers that of relevant price and cletails 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. The said order of releasing of the goods was subjected to challenge before the Hon'bleSupremeCourt;wheretheHon'bleSupremeCourtin \ 4 SLP.No.42808124, datedl5.CI|.2025, has refused to interfere with the order pasrsed by this Bench.

6. However, as regards the proceedings before 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 held entitled for participation in the adjudicating proceedings.

7. Pursuant to the disposal of the SLP, this Court 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 melno and prayer is also only for an interim release of the seized goods.

9. In the factual matrix narrated in the preceding paragraphs, we are of the considered opinion that the instant u,rit petition also therefore can 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 ro represent before the adjudicating authority: t II 5

10. Thus, for all the aforesaid reasons, it is ordered that let the respondent authorities pass an order on the application filed by the petitioner for provisional release of the goods subject to the conditions that: a) The petitioner shall payldeposit the enhanced duty amount. On receipt of such enhanced duty amount paid by the petitioner, 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 fbrthwith within one (01) week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order' On receipt of such quantification, the payrnent shall be immediately made by the petitioner and on receipt of the payment in entirety, the goods shall be released as 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 further proceedings including the adjudication in the manner known to law. \ \ d) It is further made clear that so far as the condition of the petitioner that demmurage charges till date, for the goods be considered for waiver, in this regard, if any application is filed by the petitioner seeking such a waiver of demmurage charges, the same shall be considered and decided by the respondents objectively. In addition, the petitioner is also directed to provide a bank

11. guarantee worlh 10 percent of the total price of the goods imported by them. Further, it is also ordered that in the event if the petitioner upon release of the goods provisionally makes and sell the supply to \ 6 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

12. Needless to mention that the adjudicating authority in the process of deciding the sbme would not be in any manner influenced by the order of conditional release ordered by this Court. The authority shall decide the same considering the objections and contentions that would be raised on either side.

13. Accordingly, this writ petition is allorved. No order as to Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/.P. PONNA KRISHNA SISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ^lt I'j sEcTtoN oFF|CER To,

1. The commissioner of customs., (Hyderabad ll) lmports, GST Bhavan, opp. L E. Stadium, BaSheer Bagh, Hyd'eiabad_ Sb-0b04. 2. The Joint commissioneiof cirstoms (lmp-orts),'bpp.L.B. stadium, GST - Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad _SbOdO+.-" - 3' The Assistant Comriissioher of C-ustoma-O/o Dy. Commissioner of Customs, - - - '' . lCD, Thimmapur, Ranga Reddy _5Og 32S'. 4. The superintendent of-custom's,^gt-o oy. commissioner of customs, lcD, r- - _ Thimmgpur, Ranga Reddy _SOg SZS 5. one cc to sRt tu4t_LA REDDY g^.gE4!Ly, Advocate [opUCl 6- one cc to M/s. DoMrNrc FEcNANDEb'isil s"c*io"r-aBi6) ioluct 7. Two CD Copies BN ,w l,rQ BS .f CC TODAY "t tlE i4S i'it(-l -\, o t * HIGH COURT DATED:10/1 212025 ORDER WP.No.37952 of 2025 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 6, \\ I I t €