M/S. Glamex vs. Union Of INDIA
Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Glamex, filed a writ petition challenging a Seizure Memo dated 12.02.2026, issued by the Superintendent of Customs (4th respondent). The petitioner sought the release of an imported consignment of 206 units of Multi-Function Devices, under Bill of Entry dated 03.02.2026. The goods were seized by the Customs authorities. 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 to the petitioner.
Held
The High Court, referencing previous similar writ petitions (e.g., W.P.No. 12489 of 2025) that were allowed by this Bench, ordered the provisional release of the seized goods. The release is subject to specific conditions: the petitioner must pay/deposit the enhanced duty amount, which the Customs authorities are to quantify within one week of receiving the order. The goods are to be released within four weeks of the enhanced duty payment. The court clarified that this order does not impede the Customs Department's right to proceed with further proceedings, including adjudication, in accordance with the law. The petitioner is also directed to provide a bank guarantee worth 10 percent of the total price of the imported goods and to maintain and make available details of subsequent transactions to the respondent authorities. The adjudicating authority is to decide the matter objectively, without being influenced by this conditional release order. The writ petition was allowed on these terms.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Seizure Memo dated 12.02.2026, issued by the 4th respondent, is without jurisdiction and contrary to the Foreign Trade Policy 2023? 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the immediate release of the imported consignment of 206 units of Multi-Function Devices under Bill of Entry dated 03.02.2026? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the seizure was without jurisdiction and contrary to the Foreign Trade Policy 2023. They sought the release of the goods, highlighting the potential for severe loss and hardship if the goods were not released promptly. The petitioner relied on previous orders of the High Court in similar matters where goods were released provisionally. Respondents' arguments: The respondents, represented by the Deputy Solicitor General of India and Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC, did not explicitly record arguments in the judgment regarding the validity of the seizure or the petitioner's entitlement to release. However, the court's order implies that the Customs Department would proceed with further proceedings including adjudication.
Sections Cited
Section 226
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
134471 INTHEHIGHcoURTFoRTHESTATEoFTELANGANAATHYDERABAD (SPecial Original Juri iction) THUR AY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA WRIT PETITION NO:517 oF 202 M/s. Glamex, rep. by its Authorised Representative, Mr. Chillara Krishna, office at- iiaoAliOg Bii[t.liodiri Bldg, Sadanaird Hasu, Tandel Marg, Near Century Bazar, Prabhadevi, Mumbai'400 025. Between: AND 1 Union of lndia, Rep. by its Secretary' Building, 3'd Floor, Sansad Marg, New De ...PETITIONER Ministry of Finance, Jeevan DeeP thi-110 00'1. 2. Joint Commissioner of Customs (lmports)' Hyderabad-500 004. GST Bhavan, Basheerbagh,
Deputy Commissioner of Customs, lCD, Thimmapur-SO9 325' Telangana' 4.suoerintendentofCustoms'(lCD.Thimmapur),HyderabadCustoms Cohmissionerate, HYderabad. ...RESPONDENTS petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleasedtoissueaWritofMandamusoranyotherappropriatewritororderor direction setting aside the Seizure Memo dated '2'2026 issued by the 4th Respondent as bein
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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.