MINK TRADECOM PVT. LTD. Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Notice. Mr. Anurag Ahluwalia, the learned counsel, accepts notice on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1, 3, 4 and 5. Mr. Sanjeev Narula, the learned Senior Standing Counsel accepts notice on behalf of Customs (Respondents 2 and 6).

(2.) The petitioner prays that the consignment of gold coins imported by it from Seoul, South Korea should be permitted to be cleared without imposing restrictions in terms of Notification Nos. 24/2015-20 and 25/2015-20, both dated 25th August, 2017. The petitioner also challenges a Show Cause Notice ('SCN') dated 8th September, 2017 issued to it by the Commissioner of Customs on the basis of an OM dated 6th September, 2017 issued by the Directorate General of Foreign Trade ('DGFT') by which the petitioner has been asked to show cause as to why the goods imported should not be confiscated under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 ('Act') since they were imported contrary to the restrictions placed on such import by the aforementioned two notifications and further why penalty should not be imposed under Section 112 of the Act.

(3.) The petitioner filed a Bill of Entry ('B/E') with regard to the import of the said consignments of gold coins which were dispatched from Seoul, South Korea by air in the early hours of 25th August, 2017. The petitioner has produced a copy of the relevant Airway Bill which shows that the consignment was dispatched by air from Seoul, South Korea on 25th August, 2017. In terms of para 2.17 of the Foreign Trade Policy, 2015-20 ('FTP') read with para 9.11 of the Handbook of Procedures ('HoP'), the date of import was the date of shipment/dispatch, which in terms of the said paras would be the "Date of relevant airway bill provided this represents date on which goods left last airport in the country from which the import is effected."