M/S.City Office Equipment vs. Union Of INDIA
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s. City Office Equipment, filed a writ petition challenging a seizure memo dated March 25, 2026, issued by the Superintendent of Customs (4th respondent). The petitioner sought the release of an imported consignment of 220 units of Multi-Functional Devices (MFDs) under Bill of Entry No. 7867152 dated March 4, 2026. The petitioner also filed an interim application seeking provisional release of the seized goods pending the disposal of the writ petition, citing irreparable loss and severe hardship. The respondents are the Union of India and various Customs authorities.
Held
The Court noted that similar writ petitions of identical nature had been considered by the Bench, wherein a conditional interim order was passed permitting the release of seized goods subject to the petitioner fulfilling certain conditions. The Court referred to a previous order in W.P. No. 12489 of 2025, which outlined conditions for provisional release, including depositing the enhanced duty amount, quantification of duty within one week, and furnishing a bank guarantee. The Court also clarified that the order would not impede the Customs Department's adjudication proceedings. In the present case, the Court found that the stage of proceedings was similar, with the prayer being for an interim order for the release of seized goods. Therefore, the Court disposed of the writ petition at the admission stage, reserving the right of the adjudicating authority to take appropriate decisions after permitting the petitioner to represent before it. The Court ordered the respondent authorities to pass an order on the petitioner's application for provisional release subject to the stipulated conditions, including payment of enhanced duty, quantification of duty, and furnishing a bank guarantee. The Court also directed that demmurage charges waiver would be considered if an application was filed, and that the adjudicating authority's process would not be influenced by this conditional release order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the seizure memo dated March 25, 2026, issued by the 4th respondent is without jurisdiction and contrary to the Foreign Trade Policy 2023, warranting its setting aside? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner contended that the seizure memo was issued without jurisdiction and in contravention of the Foreign Trade Policy 2023. They sought the release of the imported consignment. Respondents' Argument: The respondents, represented by the Deputy Solicitor General of India and Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC, appeared and perused the record. The judgment does not explicitly detail their arguments against the petitioner's claims but indicates their participation in the proceedings.
Sections Cited
Section 151
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
The Cou( made the following: ORDER
.l .THE HONOTiRAIILE SI{I JUSTTCE P.SAM KOSHY AND THI' IIONOURATILE SRI JUSTICE N:\RSING RAO NANDIKONDA W.P.No.l0560 of 2026 Date:08.0J.2026 []etrveen: M/s.Citl Olficc lrquiprnent. Chennai. l-arnilnadu. .. Petitioncr .{nd IInion of India. rep.by its Secretary, I)epartrnent of Rcvcnuc. Ministrl,' oi liinance. ( jolt.ol India. Ncu, [)clhi and othcls. . - . Responclcnts ORDER, (par tlt,n'blt 'Sri .lttrtitL t' .*rnt iwtth..t 1 I lc'ard Mr.K.t{ama Srinivas, lealned counsel repre senting Mr.Akkapeddi Srinivas, learrred cortnseI for the petitioner; Mr.N.Bhujanga Rao, lea';nerl Dc;rr-rty Solicitor General ol India, appc'arin-tr fbr respondent No. I and Iv{r'.Dominic Femandes, learr-red Senior Standing Counsel {br ttre CBIC-, appealing for respondent Nos.2 to 4 and perused the record. 2. -fhe itrstant u,rit petition hers heen filed assailing the seizure memo. dated 25.03.2026, issued by rhe 4,r' respondent rvith the further request to forthwith release tlte imported consignnlent of the nr u ltilunctional clevices (?20 unirs) ,nder Bilr of Enny No.7g67 r 52 dated 04.03.202(t.
2 3 Sinrilar u'rit petititlrls oi icletrtrcal nature have alreacll' becn considered bv this Ilench $. hercir-r l;\' rval' of a conditional interirrr or<lel this Berrch hacl llerrlrittetl iitc rclca.e ''rl'sr:ized goods suhiect 10 thc pctitionet/irrtport,:r iirllillirrg ccltaitl corrdition:;'
Onc such rvrit l.rctilion i:; W.i).r.-o 12489 of 2025; where the goods irnportccl trcrc scizctl l:r !he Cttston's authorities and by vifiue o1' the irltcrinr orclcr o1' tt,is lligh (lourl' the Clustotns aUthoritiestlct.cot.derr't|ttlrclcascorlthciirIIorvingcorrditiorrs.For con\ e lllellcc. rr t- r'eprtrt[tce Ptit No.;.16 & 27 of the older :rgr-irph passccl irr the atbrcsaicl rrrit pctitiorl hercinutlder: it is orrlercd lhat let ttre rcsponclct.lt lltrthoritic: llits:: ati ol'dcl ort lhc applicatitlrl filed b1' tltc Ietitioners tirr'1IrIrr:'itirI'iI rcli.AsL'()l 1l1c goods sLrbicct to lhc conditions t hat l(r. Ihrrs- lirr lrll lhc rLiirlcr,tici rcasrltr:r ir) I hc Pclitioncr -'hrrll p:tr ''lcposit the cnlranccd dutl'amout.tt' On rcceipt ol suclt cllillritcr:r-l (llri" :rllrotlnt pai'l bv the pelitioncrs' thc soods itr questiort 'lrali b. lck:ased rvirhin iL perioJ o1'four' t04) u ecks thercalicr b; lior-palntcllt ()l \tr(il (irrl\. ritrlrrrtilicatioll sl.rall be rnade by tlre ( rls1oll15 lirthuith "'itllltl 'rr'c ((ll) \\eck trrrn thc datc of rcccipt of I cop) ol' tllls orr'lcr. (.)tr '"":lt:.":,:"::,l-,lel ".. "; \\re pq,me*r "r' ': ll]':1",1:1,J, ",-"',,:.. shal\ bc ,e\eased as rrcr\ft r\\ u't n"tlt,:,.',,,,,:r liirrrr ,,1 rirrrr (()1) *tt: _ irrdit ltlJ ih'rre lt' "''
l, I 3 c) rr is ,,ade rj ,:.,^:'ilI';:l:;:il|":H:l'::: C ustoms Depaftment to go at *tutl'ilig;; "-udication in the mattner known to law' c ) I t rs lurthef *""'"":.:::." i i1;liT"fJ:J:':: pcririrruer rhat dcrttttrut rtgc,:1";:;a. ;;: r^, applicarion is fi te,l hr considcrcd l.r r.aiver'. in lhls regaru' " "'l^::,,.^." charges. the ;;.;;,""",, seeking such a r'l::::I-- ;-i ::H*** same shall be considered obiectivelY 27 ln additkrn' the petitionets arc also directed 't1 n'ouiO" a bank quarantec wo(h t0 '"'"""' .,'th" total-price oi the goods inrportecl b1' thern ftu'tf'"t] 't i' 'ltt' o'dcrtcl that in t[-re event if the petitioners upon release nt'f'" good' provisionally make and se ll thc supply nl th"i' t"to*"t'' t1"tails.of t1-'" ":1::::":t- tn* "' relevant pricc and details oi the respective transactions shall be mainraincd and nade availatrlc to the respondefl authorities lrom ) tinre to tlmr- Pursuant to the said intertm clirection and upon the petitioner therein tulfilting the conditions stipulated by the High Coufi, the seized goods rvere released to the petitioner' The said order of releasing of the goods was subiected to challenge before the Hon'ble Supreme Courl; rvhel'e the Hon'ble Supreme Court tn SLP.No.42808/24, datecll5'0 1'2025' has refused to interfere with the order Passe<J bY'this Rench' I I
i
Horver.er, as r.cgar.ds Lirs proceedingr- belbre the acljudicating author-ity is concerncd. thc I Ir,;t.hlc Supre rne (,.ourt pefmitted the ad-ludicating authorit_v to 1-rro,:etci antj lecirl.- thi: same stuictlv in accordance q,ith larr. .1.h.-, ilCl it:o ll L'I aiso held entitled for pafticipation in the acljuclicating piocccclirrus 7 ' Pursuant to thc cisi.:os:rr o| ihe st.tr. ti:is (_.our1 has disposed of all such writ petit.iors r.r4rc;-rh-1 rhc goods ..r,ere r.ereased and the proceed ings rver-e pc ncl i ns hc-i r;i.c rlr e :l rJ.i ird i cali n v au tlrorily. 8' Si,rila*aturr: .r ri,, Ls ,ir t iirs. [lrr-.r'e irr the iristalrt case aiso wherc the stage at this.irrnclu;.c is otrl_r, ihe seizutr:r menlo alld prayer is also only fbr an inle I'irn irl(r;:-\.,, ri'lfie sciz:ed ritrr:ds.
In the f-actual rrratrir nlir-uterl in the prececlirrg paragraphs, we are ol' the consider.ed oIi.i.;t th,t thc instant writ pctition also therclore can be disposcd ot at rhe adnrission stagc itselt. Reserving the right of the adjuilicati:rg auth<,ritv to talie approor-iate decision in the proceedings alier oerrtriiiing the pctitioner lo represent befot'e the adludicating authorit) : i0.'I\rus' lor a\\ the ii[ort:said r;iesons' iL rs or<iered that let thc Ieslondent'rufhollties !'ass 'rn rrider on the applicati.n tiItE-tv ti-t'
/l petitioner for provisionai release of the goods subject to the conditions that: a) Thc petitioner shall pa-v-/deposit the enhanccd duty amount. Orr rcccipt ol' such enhanced duty amount paid by the petitioner'-s, the goods in question shall be released within a period of fbur (04) weeks thereafter. b) For payment ol- such duty, cluantification shall be made by the Customs tbrthwith within one (01) week tionr the date ol'receipt ol'e copy of this order. On receipt. ot' such quarrtiliciltion, the payment shall be inrmccliatcll tnade by the petitioner-s and on receipt of the payrncnt in entiret;'. the goods shall be released as indicatcd abovc at thc otrtcl limit of tbur (04) weeks' c) [t is rnade clear that this order will not stand in the rvay lor Custonrs L)eparttnettt to go ahead with the lurthcr proceedings including the adjudication in the rnanner knowtr to lart'. d) It is lirrtl-rer made clear that so far as the condition ol thc petitionc'r that detntnurage charges till date, lor the goods be considered tbr waiver, in this legard, il any application is filed by the petitioners seeking such a waivet of demmurage charges, the same shalt be considered and decided by the respondents objectively. f \ I j
gLralantee \vor1h l0 pcrcent ()f thc toisl f-'iicc oi thc goods impofted by lhem. 1;uflhcr, it is also orCercd that in tht: e.''ent if the pctitioner tupon rclease 6f ths oootls pn", isiotlailr' Illiike s alld sell the stlpply to thcir custonret's. details ot'lhc cLrsionlcl) that tlf rclevant price and details ol the respcctivr' tritirsa.rlio,lli shall l-rL: rlraintaincd and made available to tlie respondent autholities Ito;l tirtre to time.
Necdless to nrerrtion tirat Lire rrri;uclicatirrg authority in the In acldition. thc 1-,t-liriotlcr.i:; also <lirr--cief, 1tt provitle a barlk pl'ocess ol' dcciding tirc :uine r,.or.,lil it,rt bc in any manner To inlluenced bv the ordcr of contlirional rclerrsi urdered b1' this Court Tl-rc authoritv shall dccidr: tirc sarrre consiciciing thc objections and conlentions thal would [re raisi:d orr eithcr sirlc I3. Accordinglv, tltis wr-it pi'rrtion is allorved. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous applic.rtioirs pcnrling. il' en_r,, sha[[ stand closcd //// . K.BHAVANI SWAMY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR -z/(=* SECTION OFFICER
The Secretary, Union of India, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance' Govt. of lndia, New Delhi 2.TheJointCommissionerofCustoms(lmports)GSTBhavan'Basheebagh, Hyderabad - 500004
The Deputy Commissioner of Customs lCD, Sanathnagar - 500018' Telangana
The Superintendent of Customs' lnland Container Depot' Sanathnagar Hyderabad Customs Commissionerate, Hyderabad - 500018' Telangana
One CC to SRt AKKAPEDD| SR|N|VAS, Advocate tOpUCI ' l&tZ? to SRI N.BHUJANGA RAo, DEpury soircrron cENERAL oF tNDtA
One CC ro SRt DOM|N|C FERNANDES, SENTOR SC FOR CB|C [OPUC] B. Two CD Copies PSK. TKS w ' ---7 I I I I i I
\ HIGH COURT DATED: 0810412026 ORDER WP.No.10560 of 2026 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS o,\., ,.i'*.b" '\' 0 4 I,IAY 2026 l,.i.\,; . t'i\ ".< ' 10 ."e S* i-'dl .- /7 .. . .1.:
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.