Commissioner of Customs vs Magus Metals P. Ltd.

IA No. 3 of 2012, has been filed in Civil Appeal No. 5720 of 2008, inter alia, for a direction upon the Commissioner of Customs, Hyderabad, the Appellant herein, to release the seized 96.74 Metric Tonnes of Copper Concentrate to the Respondents, so that the same could be processed and disposed of by them in accordance with the Hazardous Wastes (Maintenance and Handling) Rules, 1989.

The goods had been detained by the Customs Authorities mainly on account of their alleged hazardous qualities. On appeal to the Tribunal, the detention of the goods on the aforesaid ground was held to be erroneous and it was directed that the goods could be released treating them as Copper Concentrate.

When the I.A. was taken up for consideration, certain provisions of the Customs Manual, were brought to our notice by Mr. Shekhar, learned senior counsel, appearing for the Customs Authorities, which, in fact, provide for release and clearance of goods. In the guidelines for expeditious clearance/provisional release, paragraph 2.2. has been brought to our notice, of which sub-paragraph (c) is relevant for our purpose. The same is, accordingly, extracted herein below:

2.2.(c) But for certain exceptional categories, in any dispute case pending investigation wherever importer or exporter is willing, he should be allowed provisional clearance of the goods by furnishing a bond for full value of the goods supported by adequate bank guarantee as may be determined by the proper officer. The value of bank guarantee shall not exceed twice the amount of duty. The provisional clearance should be allowed as a rule and not as an exception. Provisional release may not be restored to in the cases mentioned below but here too option for storage in warehouses u/s 49 of the Customs Act, 1962 should be provided to the importers (goods can be allowed entry into the country only after the laid down quality standards etc. are satisfied):

(i) Goods prohibited for import/export;

(ii) Imports for complying with the specifications/conditions/ requirements of various Orders/Acts (e.g. Livestock Importation Act, 1898, Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, etc.); and

(iii) Where gross fraudulent practices are noticed and release of the goods may seriously jeopardize further investigations as also interests of the

revenue.

The said provision provides for provisional release of the goods detained.

Ms. Garima Prashad, Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents, submits on behalf of the Respondents that they undertake to abide by the said provisions and, accordingly, to do whatever was necessary in terms of the said provisions of the goods to be cleared.

Having regard to the above, this I.A. is disposed of with a direction upon the Appellant. Customs Authorities, to release the goods in question to the Respondents, subject to compliance with the provisions of Chapter 15 of the Customs Manual, 2011.

The representatives of the Respondents will be at liberty to appear before the Commissioner of Customs, Hyderabad, on 22nd December, 2012, at 10.30 A.M., for working out this order.