GURDEEP KAUR Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of present petition, the petitioner assails order dated 06.04.2015 passed by Assistant Commissioner, Customs Preventive (Alpha Group), New Delhi whereby the consignment of the petitioner was provisionally released subject to execution of bond for re -determined value of the imported goods i.e. Rs. 54,48,608/ - (Rupees Fifty four lakhs forty eight thousand six hundred eight) supported with cash deposit of differential duty of Rs. 10,00,000/ - (Rupees Ten lakhs) and bank guarantee of Rs. 8,00,000/ - (Rupees eight lakhs) with auto renewal clause.

(2.) SHORN off unnecessary details, the facts of the present case are that vide panchnama dated 11 -12.02.2015, the concerned seizing officer seized the consignment of goods imported by the petitioner namely auto motor parts under Bill of Entry No. 8242439 dated 09.02.2015 and MAWB No. 176 -7496 -6124 bearing an assessable value of Rs. 3,18,125.44 under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962, on the allegations that the value and description of those goods were concealed and mis -declared and further that excess goods were found in the consignment. Vide letter dated 03.03.2015 addressed to the Joint Commissioner of Customs (Prev.), the petitioner asked for release of the goods. Again vide another communication dated 08.03.2015 addressed to the Commission of Customs (Prev.), with its copy to the Chief Commissioner of Customs (Prev.), the petitioner once again requested the respondent for the provisional release of her goods while complaining about the behavior of an official of the department. The petitioner sent another letter dated 25.03.2015, to the Chief Commissioner of Customs (Prev.). On 01.04.2015 yet another letter was handed over which was replied to vide impugned order/letter dated 06.04.2015 by the Assistant Commissioner, Customs Preventive (Alpha Group) of the respondent. In terms of the order dated 06.04.2015, the value of the petitioner's goods were re -determined at Rs. 54,48,608/ - supported with cash deposit of differential duty of Rs. 10,00,000/ - and bank guarantee of Rs. 8,00,000/ - with automatic renewal clause as per prescribed format.

(3.) IT was lastly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in case the goods are not released to the petitioner immediately they would deteriorate in quality and would lose their marketability.