M/S.Prius Tecnologies vs. Union Of INDIA
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Prius Tecnologies, filed a writ petition challenging a seizure memo dated 06-05-2026, issued by the Superintendent of Customs (4th respondent). The petitioner sought the release of an imported consignment of 118 units of Multi-Functional Devices (MFDs) under Bill of Entry No. 8899558 dated 25-04-2026. The goods were seized by the Customs authorities. The petitioner also filed an interim application seeking provisional release of the seized goods pending the disposal of the writ petition, citing potential irreparable loss and severe hardship. The case involves the import of MFDs and their subsequent seizure by customs authorities.
Held
The Court held that the writ petition could be disposed of at the admission stage, following a pattern established in similar writ petitions. The Court ordered the respondent authorities to pass an order on the petitioner's application for provisional release of the goods, subject to specific conditions. These conditions include the petitioner paying/depositing the enhanced duty amount, with quantification to be made by Customs within one week. The goods are to be released within four weeks of receiving the enhanced duty payment. The Court clarified that this order would not impede the Customs Department's further proceedings, including adjudication, and that the adjudicating authority could proceed as per law. The Court also directed that any application for waiver of demurrage charges should be considered objectively. Additionally, the petitioner must provide a bank guarantee worth 10 percent of the total price of the goods and maintain details of subsequent sales to customers. The adjudicating authority is not to be influenced by this conditional release order and must decide the matter considering objections from both sides. The Court allowed the writ petition.
Key Issues
1. Whether the seizure memo dated 06-05-2026, issued by the 4th respondent, is without jurisdiction and contrary to the Foreign Trade Policy 2023, thus warranting its setting aside? 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the provisional release of the imported consignment of 118 units of Multi-Functional Devices (MFDs) pending the adjudication proceedings? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contended that the seizure memo was without jurisdiction and contrary to the Foreign Trade Policy 2023. They sought the immediate release of the imported consignment. The petitioner also argued for provisional release of the goods to avoid irreparable loss and severe hardship, relying on the principle of allowing such releases in similar cases. Respondents' Arguments: The respondents, represented by the Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC, did not explicitly record arguments in the judgment. However, their role as customs authorities implies a defense of the seizure and the need for further proceedings, including adjudication, as per law.
Sections Cited
Section 151
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
The Court made the following: ORDER
- IN TIIE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T' MADTIAVI DEVI AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M'MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION No. 166380F 2026 DATE: 14.O5.2026 Between: M/s.Prius Tecnologies ...Petitioner AND Union of India and 3 others ...ResPondents ORDER: Heard Mr- Akkapeddi Srinivas' learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr' Dominic Fernandes' learned Senior Standing Counsel for the CBIC for respondent Nos'2 to 4' Perused the record.
The instant writ petition has been hled assailing the seizure memo dated 06 'O5 '2026 ' issued by the 4rh respondent with the further request to forthwith release the imported consignment of the multifunctional devices (1 18 units) under Bi[ ol entry No.8899558 dated' 25'O4'2026. - 2
Similar writ petitions of identical nature have already been considerecl b1' this Bench ,,r,herein by vvay of a conditional interim order this Bench had permitted the release of seize<l goods subject to the petitioner/ im porter fullilling cerlain conditions
One such u,rit petition is \[.P.No.12489 of 2025; u,here the good s imporl.ed rvere seized by the Customs authorities and bv virtue of the interim order of this l{igh Court, the Customs authorit,ies uere ordered to release on the following conditions. For convenience, xe reproduce paragraph Nos.26 & 27 ol the order passed in the aforesaid writ petition he reinunder
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 ttrat: a) The petitioner shall pay/deposit the enhanced 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) u'eeks thereaftcr.
-- ,/ 3 b) For payment of such duty, quantification shall be made by the Customs forthwith within one (01) week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such quantification, the payment shall be immediately made by the petitioners and on receipt of the paymenl in entirety, the goods shalt be released as indicated above at the outer limit of tour (04) u'eeks' c) It is made clear that this order rvill not stand in the way for Customs Departmen[ to go ahead with the further proceedings including the adjudication in the manner known to law'' d) It is further m "-de 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 arry application is filed by the petitioner seeking such a waiver of demmurage charges, the same shall be considered and decided by the resPondents objectivelY. 27 . ln addition, the petitioner is also directed to provide a bank guarantee worth 10 percent of the total price of the goods imported by them' Further' it is also ordered that in the event if the petitioners l.pon release of the gcods provisionally make and sell the supply to their customers, details of the clrstomers that of relevant price and details of the - 4 respective transactions shall be maintained and made available to the respondent authorities from time to tim,:.
Pursuant lt; the said interim direction and upon the petitioners therein fulfi1ling the conditions stipulated by the High Court, the seized goods were released to the petitioners The said order of releasing of the goods \\raS subjected to challenge before the Hon'ble Supreme Court; u,here the Hon'ble Supreme Court ln St.P. No.42808 /24, dated15.O I .2025, has refused to interlere u,ith the order passed by'this Bench
Hou'ever, as regards the proceedirrgs 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 lau,. Thc petitioners are also held entitled for participation in the adj udicating proceedings.
Pursuant to the disposal of the SLP, this Court has disposed of all such writ petitions whereby the goods were released and the proceedings adj udicating authority. were pending beforc the -- 5 B. Similar nature of facts are also there in the instant case also where the stage at this Juncture is only the seizure memo 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 writ petition also therefore can be disposed of at the admission stage itself. Resen,ing the right of the adjudicating authority to take appropriate decision in the proceedings after permitting the petitioner to represent before the adj udicating authority:
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 pay/deposit 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.
5 b) For payment of such riuty, quantilication shall be meLde br, the Customs forthwith within one (01) wcek from the date of receipt of a cop_v of this order. On receipt of such quantification, the pavment s;hall be immediately made by the petitioner and on receipt of the payment in entiretl , the goods shall bc released as indicated above at the outer lirnit ol four (O4) weeks. c) It is made clear that this order will not stand in the $,av for Customs Dcpartment to go ahead u'ith the further proceedings including the adjudication in the manner knori,n to lar,r.. d) It is further made clear that so far as the condition of the petitioner that demurrage charges till date, for the goods be considered for rvaiver, in this regard, if any application is filed by the petitioner seeking such a waiver of demurrage charges, thc same shall be considered and decided b-v the respondents objectively. I 1. In acldition, the petitioner is also directed to provide a bank guarantee worth lO percent of the total price of the goods imported bv them. Further, it is also ordered that in the event if the petitioner upon release of the goods provisionally -rt b. and sell ttre supply to their customers, details ol the customers that of relevant price and details of the respective
--- To, 7 transactions shall be maintained and made avaiiable to the respondent authorities from time to time.
Needless to mention that the adjudicating authority in the process of deciding the same 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.
Accordingly, this writ petition is allou,ed. There shall be no order as to costs B. Two CD CoPies' BSK S' GJP Miscellaneous applications pending, it aly, shall stand crosed B5'3;?'"ih'S3"-'^'J /,lt Gi SECTION OFFICER I The Secretary' Depadment of Revenue' Union of lndia' Ministry of Finance' , ffIr:llH#:"''"".]:i or customs (imports)' GSr Bhavan' Basheebash' . l*::::1, iffison".. or customs' rcD' rimmapur - 50e325' reransana ' ::"..: :,*H',","..t hdiil"d "11"q ]::.:u r) Hvd e ra bad c u sto ms 5. one cc to sRrnxxnpiooisRrNrvAs' ^'*":t: l:::31",u, ot rndia' Hish :::::ii}];sl"t'"ll",aU",t,xefi,:':i#:,,":k";,_er.rcB,c , ;;;;; t'o sRl DoMrNrc FERNANDES' senior s ioPucl
HIGH COURT DATED: 1410512026 ORDER VACATION COURT , ,r.E S74 15 a',\(v 2 0 I'IAY 2026 z C) .\\ \\ t e WP.No.16638 of 2026 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS .ef'L :- \-_ \o \+-" 6pvr 'I al
Reproduced from the public record of the Telangana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.