M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Union Of INDIA
Original PDF →Facts
The Petitioner, M/s. Arka Business Solutions, filed a writ petition challenging a Seizure Memo dated March 16, 2026, issued by the 4th Respondent, Superintendent of Customs. The Petitioner sought the release of an imported consignment of 107 units of Multi-Function Devices, under Bill of Entry dated March 7, 2026, bearing No. 7926242. The Petitioner argued that the seizure was without jurisdiction and contrary to the Foreign Trade Policy 2023. The petition also included an interim application seeking the immediate release of the seized goods pending the disposal of the writ petition, citing potential severe loss and hardship. The Respondents are the Union of India and various Customs authorities.
Held
The High Court, following its previous orders in similar writ petitions, directed the respondent authorities to pass an order on the Petitioner's application for provisional release of the goods subject to certain conditions. These conditions include the Petitioner paying/depositing the enhanced duty amount, with quantification to be made by Customs within one week of the order. The goods are to be released within four weeks of the enhanced duty payment. The Court clarified that this order would not impede further proceedings, including adjudication, by the Customs Department. It was also made clear that any application by the Petitioner for waiver of demurrage charges would be considered objectively. Additionally, the Petitioner must provide a bank guarantee worth 10 percent of the total price of the imported goods and maintain records of sales to customers, including prices and transaction details, for the respondent authorities. The adjudicating authority is not to be influenced by this conditional release order and must decide the matter considering objections from both sides. The writ petition was allowed.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Seizure Memo dated March 16, 2026, issued by the 4th Respondent is without jurisdiction and contrary to the Foreign Trade Policy 2023? (Question of law) 2. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to the immediate release of the imported consignment of 107 units of Multi-Function Devices pending adjudication? (Question of mixed law and fact) Petitioner's arguments: The Petitioner contended that the seizure was without jurisdiction and violated the Foreign Trade Policy 2023. They sought the release of the goods, highlighting the potential for severe financial loss and hardship if the goods were not released promptly. The Petitioner relied on previous orders of the High Court in similar matters where seized goods were released conditionally. Revenue/State's arguments: The judgment does not explicitly record arguments made by the Revenue/State. However, their participation is evident through the appearance of the Deputy Solicitor General of India and Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC.
Sections Cited
Section 129
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
The Court made the following: ORDER
tN TTIE HICH COUR'I' FOIT'[[IE S'[A'I'B OF'TELANGANA AT IIYDETIABAD TI{E HONOURABLB SIU JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA Writ Petition No.9006 of 2A26 D:rtecl: 30.03.2026 Between: M/s.Arka Business Solutions . Petitioner AN t) Union ol'lndia, Rep by its Secrctary, Ministry of Finance, Jecvall Dc,:p [Jtrilding, 3'd Uoor. Sarrsad Marg, New Delhi -- | l0 001 and otlters. ... R.esporrdents OR (per IIon'blc Sri.lu.ttict' l).Sum Kosltv) ER, Heard Mr.Tarun Ciradha, leartrecl counsel reprcsenting Mr.P.Karthik Ramana, learned counsel fbr the petitioner and Mr.N.Bhujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing on behalf of, respondent No.l and Mr.Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Stancling C--outrsel for CBIC appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 4. Perused the record. 2. 'ilre instant writ pctitiorr has been liled assailing the seizure rnerno dated 16.03.2026. issucd by tlte 4'r' respotrdent with the 2 firrther rccluest to lilrthwith release the irnported consignment of the Multi-l'urrctional Devices ( 107 units) undcr llill of Entry No.792(1242 datcd 07 .03.2026. i. Sinrilar r.r,rit ltetitions of identical nature have already been considcrcd by this Bench wherein by way ol'a conditional intcrirn ordcr this Bcnch had pennitted the release of seized goods subject to thc 1'rctitiorrcriirnltortcr tuIfiIling certain conditions.
Onc such rvrit pctition is W.P.No. 12489 of, 2025; where rhe goods irnportccl were seized by the Custorns authorities and by r irluc ol' tlrc irrtcrim order of this I{igh Court. the Customs rruthoritics werc orclered to release on the lbllowing conditions. lror ctrrrvenicncc, \ /e reproduce paragraplr Nos.2(r & 27 of the order passcd in thc alilrcsaid writ pctition hereinunder: l(r.'l'hus. lirr all thc albresaid reasons. it is ordcrcd that lct tlre rcsponclcnt authoritics pass an ordcr on thc application filcd by tlrc pctitiorrcrs lirr provisional relcasc ol'tlrc goocls subjcct to thc crrutlitirrns that: a) T lrc pctrtioner shall payldcposit thc enhanccd duty alnount. On rcccipt of strch cnhanccd duty arnount paicl by thc pctitioners. tlrc soorls iu tFrcstion shall be rclcasecl u,ithiu a pcriotl of lilur (0-l) rvccks tlrcrcaltcr.
3 b) For payment of such duty, cluantilication shall be madc by the Custorns fbrthwith r,vithin onc (01) rveek from the datc of receipt of a copy of this orcler. On receipt gf such quantitication, thc paynent shall be imrnediately made by the petitioners and ou receipt of the paymellt i1 eutirety, tfie goods shall b-e released as indicated above at the outer linrit of tbur (04) wecks' c) lt is ntade clear that this oKlcr will not stand in the way fbr Customs Department to go altcad with the turther proceeclings inclucling the adjudication in ths nranncr kttowtt to larv. d) tt is further macle clcar that so lirr as the conclititlu of the petitioner that demrnurage charges till date, for thc goods bc considered for waiver, in t[is rcgarcl, if any application is filecl hy the petitioners seekipg such a rvaiver 6l'detntnurage cftargcs, tfue satne shall be consi{erecl aucl clecitlcd by t[e respondctrts objectively. 27. htaddition, the petitioners arc also clirected to provide a bank guarantee worth l0 percent of the krtal price of the goods imported by tl'rern. Furthcr, it is also orclered tfiat in the event it' tfte petitiolers upoll release of the go<lds provisiolally rnake artcl scll the supply to their custolnefs, details of the custollers that of relevant price and cletails ot'the respective transactions shall be rurairrtained and rnadc available to the respondent autfuorities tton time to time.
Pursuant to the said interim direction and upon the petitioner therein fulfilling the conditions stipulated by the l-ligh Court, the seized goods were released to tfie petitioner. The said order of \ --1
4 rclcasins of' thc goods was sub.iectcd to challenge belbtc the llon'ble Srrprcnrc (lourt; rvlrcrc thc l{on'ble Sultrenrc Court in Sl.P.No.l2ll0lt/24. daLcd l-5.01.2025, has relused to interf'crc rvith lhc ortlcr pirsscd b1, this llcnclr. 6. llorvcvcr', as rcgarcls thc proceedings betbre thc adjudicating autlroritv is conccrned, thc Ilon'blc Supremc Coult pcnnitted the arljucliclting authority to procccd and dccidc the sanrc strictly in rrccorclarrcc rvitlr lar.r,. 'l'hc. petitioner is also hcld entitlcd Ibr. pir rt ic ipatiorr i rr the acl iud icating proceedi ngs. 7. [)ursuant to tl)c disposal of thc SLP, this Court has disposed ol'all such \r,rit pctitious u,hcrch1, thc goods were rcleascd and the proceetlirrrs \\/cre pcndiug bclbrc the adjudicating authority. ll Sirnilar naturc ol'Iacts are also therc in the instant case also u lro'c thc sl.itge at this juncture is only the scizure lnetno and prayer is also orrl1.' lirl an irrterim rclcase olttre seized goods. (). lrr thc lactual tnatrix narrated in the preceding paragraphs, we arc ol'thc consitlclecl oltiniuu that the instant writ petition also tlrcrclbrc carr bc disposcri ol'at the adrnission stage itsell. Rescr.ving
5 the right of the adjudicatipg authority to take appropriate dccision in the proceedings after pelnitting the petitioner to represent before the adj udicating authoritY.
Thus, fbr all the afbresaid reasons, it is ordered that let the respondent authorities pass an orcler on tfue application filed by the petitioners lbr provisional release of the goods subject to the conditions that: a) The petitioner shall pay/deposit the enhatrcecl cluty arnount. On receipt of such etthanced duty anroun[ paicl by the petitioners, the goods in questiop sfuall be released within a period of lbui: (04) weeks therealter. b) For payment of such duty, c'Frantifrcation shall be nade by the customs forthwith r,vithin one (01) week frorn the date of receipt of a copy of this order. on receipt of such quantification, the payment shall bc irnrnediately made by the petitioners and on receipt o1' the payment in entirety, the goods shall be released as indicated above at the outer limit of fbur (04) weeks. c) It is rnade clear that this order will not stand in the way fbr custorns Department to go ahead with the tirrther proceedings inclucling the adjudication in the nlannef known to law.
t. li 6 d) It is lurther nrade clcar that so far as the condition of' thc petitioner that dernurrage charges till datc. fbr tlrc goods bc considered {br waiver, in this regarcl, if any application is tiled by the pctitioners sccking such a waiver of denrurrage charges, the sarne shall ['rc considcred and decided by the respondents ob.jcctivcly. I l. In adclitiorr, thc petitioner is also directed to provide a Bank Guarantcc r,"'orth l0 lrercent of the total price of the goods imported by thenr. lrurtltcr. it is also ordcrcd that in thcevent if the petitioners rulrorr rclcase ol-thc goods ltrovisionally ntakes and sell the supply to their custt)r1rcrs. dctails of thc custonlers that of relevant price and details ol'tltc rcspective transactions shall be maintained and rnade availablc to thc respondent ar-rthorities from tirne to time. ll. Nccdlcss ro rnention that the adjudicating authority in the proccss ol' cleciding the sanre u,ould not be in any manner inllucncctl b1, 111" orcler of'conditional release ordered by this Court. -['lrc autlrority shall clccide thc sarne considering the objections and contentions that would bc raiscd on either side. l:1. Accorclingl),. this writ pctition is allowed
7 Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be Iro order as to costs. . AHMED ABDULLA KHAN ASSISTANT REGISTRAR e /// \./ SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Secretary, Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance, Jeevan Deep Building, 3rd Floor, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001. 2. Joint Commissioner of Customs (lmports), GST Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad-500 004. 3. Deputy Commissioner of Customs, lCD, Thimmapur-509 325, Telangana.
Superintendent of Customs, (lCD-Thimmapur), Hyderabad Customs Commissionerate, Hyderabad
One CC to SRI KARTHIK RAIVIANA PUTTAIVIREDDY, Advocate IOPUC]
One CC to SRI N.BHUJANGA RAO, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF rNDrA [OPUC]
One CC to SRI DOtvllNlC FERNANDES, SENIOR SC FOR CBIC IOPUC]
Two CD Copies PSK. TKS Ttr
HIGH COURT DATED:3010312026 ORDER WP.No.9006 of 2026 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS I 1 r{€ s14 3 zt APR 2026 zo v \ \ * 1P ^t:?& L"t ffi,r oj.'s.oarcHfo *
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.