Knife Never Found, Depth of Wounds Unknown: Delhi HC Refuses To Upgrade Stabbing Conviction From Grievous Hurt To Attempt To Murder 'AL KAMDHENU GOLD' Belongs To Kamdhenu, Not Ashiana: Delhi HC Finds 2002 Agreement Was A Licence, Not An Assignment — Grants Injunction Against Steel Rival Land Acquired In 2004 At ₹19,660/sq.m — Company Can Now Claim ₹1,30,000/sq.m After Neighbour's Plot Gets That Rate: Delhi HC Allows Amendment After 16 Years State Used Eminent Domain to Hand Over 53 Acres to a Non-Existent Company: Karnataka High Court Quashes Acquisition, Orders CBI Investigation Trademark | Passing Off Action Requires Only Likelihood Of Confusion, Not Strict Proof Of Counterfeiting: Madras High Court Buyer Failing To Pay Full Amount On Time Cannot Sustain Cheating Case If Seller Transfers Property To Third Party: Madhya Pradesh High Court State Cannot Arbitrarily Deviate From Merit-Based Posting SOP For Senior Resident Doctors: Calcutta High Court Ready Reckoner Rates Cannot Form Sole Basis For Determining Land Acquisition Compensation: Bombay High Court MACT Cannot Decide Personal Accident Claims of Vehicle Owners: Madras High Court Sets Aside Rs. 15 Lakh Award Specific Performance | Sale Agreement to Cheat Stamp Duty Is Void, But Buyer Still Gets Money Back: Madras High Court Higher Degree Cannot Substitute Essential Work Experience; Preference Operates Only Among Eligible Candidates: Supreme Court Legal Representatives Aggrieved By Arbitral Award Must Challenge It Under Section 34 Arbitration Act, Not Article 227: Supreme Court

Bombay High Court Condemns Customs Authorities for Unjust Detention of Goods and Misapplication of Regulations

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a scathing judgment, the Bombay High Court, comprising Hon'ble Justices JITENDRA JAIN and G. S. KULKARNI, has strongly criticized customs authorities for their unjustified detention of goods and the misapplication of regulations. The case centered around the release of consignments of "Lithium Ion Cells" and the dispute over compliance with Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) marking and labeling requirements.

Justices JITENDRA JAIN observed, "There is no justification whatsoever on the part of the respondents in not permitting the release of the consignments in question. In fact, we are quite surprised by the stand taken by the department and that too on complete misapplication of the provisions of the 2018 Regulations, as also the Circulars in question."

The judgment further highlighted the high-handed approach of customs officers, stating, "Such an approach, as adopted by the concerned officers of the customs, is, in fact, high-handed, unknown to the law, and counterproductive to the green initiatives of the Government of India, to promote electric vehicles."

The case also involved the issuance of a show cause notice to the petitioner under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962. While the show cause notice was challenged in the proceedings, the Court emphasized that it should proceed independently and be decided expeditiously within two months.

Bombay High Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, partly allowing the petition. The judgment not only highlights the need for customs authorities to adhere to regulations but also serves as a reminder of the importance of a fair and lawful approach in such matters.

Date of Decision: 02 November 2023

Chetak Technology Ltd. VS Union of India

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Bom-02-Nov-2023-Chetan-Technologies-Vs-UOI.pdf"]

Latest Legal News