M/S. Glamex vs. Union Of INDIA

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Glamex, filed a writ petition challenging the seizure memo dated 19.09.2025 issued by the Superintendent of Customs (ICD-Thimmapur). The petitioner sought the release of an imported consignment of 118 units of Multi-Function Devices under Bill of Entry dated 16.09.2025, bearing No. 4531232. The petitioner contended that the seizure was without jurisdiction and contrary to the Foreign Trade Policy, 2023. The High Court, in an earlier interim order, directed the release of the goods subject to certain conditions, including the deposit of enhanced duty and a bank guarantee. This interim order was challenged before the Supreme Court, which refused to interfere but permitted the adjudicating authority to proceed with the adjudication. The present petition is listed for disposal at the admission stage, with the focus on the seizure memo and the prayer for interim release.

Held

The High Court allowed the writ petition. The Court reiterated its earlier interim directions for the provisional release of the seized goods. These conditions included the petitioner depositing the enhanced duty amount, with quantification to be made by the Customs within one week of receiving the order. Upon payment, the goods were to be released within four weeks. The Court clarified that this order would not impede further proceedings, including adjudication, by the Customs Department. The Court also directed that any application by the petitioner for waiver of demurrage charges would be considered objectively by the respondents. Additionally, the petitioner was directed to provide a bank guarantee equivalent to 10 percent of the total price of the imported goods and to maintain and make available details of sales to customers to the respondent authorities. The Court emphasized that the adjudicating authority's decision would not be influenced by this conditional release order and that it should consider objections from both sides.

Key Issues

1. Whether the seizure memo dated 19.09.2025, issued by the Superintendent of Customs (ICD-Thimmapur), is without jurisdiction and contrary to the Foreign Trade Policy, 2023, warranting a writ of mandamus for the release of the imported consignment. The Petitioner argued that the seizure was illegal and beyond the authority of the Superintendent, citing the Foreign Trade Policy, 2023. The Petitioner sought the setting aside of the seizure memo and the unconditional release of the goods. The Petitioner also sought directions for the release of the goods subject to conditions, as previously ordered by the High Court, including the deposit of enhanced duty and a bank guarantee, and a waiver of demurrage charges. The Petitioner also sought to ensure that the adjudicating authority would not be influenced by the conditional release order. The Respondents, represented by the Union of India and Customs authorities, did not present any arguments recorded in the provided text regarding the validity of the seizure or the petitioner's contentions.