YVN TRADERS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Dr. S. Krishnan and, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. B. Rabu Manohar, learned Senior Panel Counsel for the respondents 1 to 4, and Mr. P. Veeraraghavan, learned counsel for the sixth respondent. Even though the fifth respondent has been served and the name of the fifth respondent is also printed in the cause list, there is no representation for the fifth respondent.

(2.) The petitioner seeks for a direction upon the respondents to release the goods imported under Bill of Entry No. 9773478, dated 20-5-2017 without payment of demurrage and container detention charges in terms of Regulation 6(1)(I) of the Handling of Cargo in Customs Areas Regulations. It is seen that the Preventive Officer of the Chennai Customs in a letter addressed to the sixth respondent with a copy marked to the fifth respondent, has clearly endorsed that the goods may be released and the detention charges of the containers since 25-3-2017 to 7-7-2017 should be waived. In spite of such endorsement being made in the letter dated 23-5-2017, the fifth and the sixth respondents have not released the cargo and not waived the detention charges. This prompted the petitioner to approach this Court by way of this writ petition.

(3.) In order to ascertain as to what was the exact reason as to why the detention charges have not been waived in spite of a specific endorsement made by the Preventive Officer and communicated to the respondents 5 and 6, this Court directed the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Department to get written instructions in the matter. The case was adjourned on two earlier dates only for this purpose.