SURESH KUMAR BANTHIA Vs. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a partner of M/s. Parasnath Industries referred to as 'the firm'). The firm imported umbrella panels of different sizes and colours in March 1993. There was six separate consignments of umbrella panels. Each of the six consignments was examined by the Customs authorities and found to correspond to the description of the goods in the voices.

(2.) The Customs Authorities, however have refused to release the six consignments unless the petitioner executed a P.D. Bond and submitted a bank garantee for 50% of the amount. The endorsement of each of the bills of entry ads - "submit P.D. Bond + submit bank guarantee as ascertained as practise (sic)m Bombay Customs. If no bank guarantee is taken at Bombay no bank garantee shall be taken at Calcutta (W/O prejudice to Collectors order in (sic))".

(3.) The petitioners moved this writ application on 10th May, 1993 upon notice to the Customs Authorities. The Customs Authorities stated that they had evidence of under-valuation of the umbrella panels. They produced three orations of three foreign sellers in this context. It was further stated that they d asked for a bank guarantee to maintain a uniform pattern in all the customs Houses in the country with respect to identical goods. It is stated that Bombay Customs were insisting on bank guarantee. Accordingly the Calcutta Customs were, to maintain such uniformity, also insisting upon the furnishing a bank guarantee. A copy of a telex was handed up to Court which reads -ease refer to your telex D.T.D. 26th April, 1993 regarding mode of clearance umbrella panels. There is verbal instruction only to release these goods under P.D. Assessment with bond and 50% bank guarantee. Not a single B/E is assessed so far accordingly, since nobody has come forward."