7 months ago
2
The Bombay High Court has travel down heavy connected a elder serviceman of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) for acting without ineligible authorization successful recalling a consignment of adust dates that had already been cleared by Customs. In a judgement delivered connected October 8, 2025, a Division Bench of Justices M.S. Sonak and Advait M. Sethna held that the officer’s actions were “prima facie high-handed” and “not backed by law.”
Sumit Kataria, a Senior Intelligence Officer with the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), was named arsenic the sixth responsive successful his idiosyncratic capacity, pursuing allegations that helium acted arbitrarily and without ineligible authorization successful recalling a consignment of cleared goods.
The lawsuit arose from a petition filed by Make India Impex, a Mumbai-based importer, whose consignment of 56 tonnes of adust dates was cleared by the Customs Department connected July 24, 2025, aft owed verification and outgo of customs work amounting to ₹6.3 lakh. The goods were released from the J.M. Baxi Container Freight Station (CFS) successful Nhava Sheva and transported to a warehouse successful Navi Mumbai.
However, aboriginal that evening, Mr. Kataria allegedly began calling the customs broker and transporter, demanding that the goods beryllium brought backmost to the CFS. The petitioner claimed that the goods were forcibly returned nether menace of terrible action, contempt having been lawfully cleared. The containers person since remained detained astatine the CFS.
The DRI serviceman justified his actions by citing quality received precocious connected July 24, suggesting that the adust dates originated from Karachi, Pakistan, and were routed done Dubai to circumvent a DGFT notification dated May 2, 2025, which prohibits imports from Pakistan. Mr. Kataria claimed helium acted successful bully religion and denied utilizing coercion, stating that helium simply “requested” the instrumentality of the goods.
The Court, however, recovered this mentation unconvincing. “At slightest prima facie, it is hard to judge that the goods were returned to the CFS solely based connected a ‘request’ of the sixth Respondent,” the Bench observed. It noted that the goods had been nether customs scrutiny for astir a week earlier being cleared, and that the due serviceman had already verified the state of root and issued the Out of Charge order.
“The sixth Respondent, who is simply a elder quality officer, by wholly ignoring the statutory bid nether Section 47 of the Customs Act, and without compliance with immoderate ineligible provisions, has virtually forced the Petitioner oregon alternatively the Customs Brokers and the Transporters, to bring backmost specified goods,” the Court held.
The Bench emphasised that adjacent if the serviceman had received intelligence, determination were ineligible procedures disposable to enactment upon it, including issuing a show-cause announcement nether Section 124 of the Customs Act. “The ends cannot ever warrant the means,” the Court said, adding, “Any alleged lack of malafides is nary substitute for acting contrary to the instrumentality oregon ineligible procedures.”
The Court besides rejected the DRI’s reliance connected Section 106 of the Customs Act, which allows officers to halt and hunt conveyances, stating that the proviso did not use to goods already cleared by Customs.
The Court directed the Customs authorities to contented a show-cause announcement wrong 4 weeks and dispose of it wrong six weeks of receiving the petitioner’s response. If the timeline is not met, the authorities indispensable merchandise the goods upon outgo of a redemption good oregon submission of a slope guarantee, the tribunal said.
The Court besides noted that wrong 2 weeks of the disputed consignment, the aforesaid importer had successfully cleared 2 akin consignments of adust dates from the aforesaid supplier and route, without immoderate objection from the authorities.
“The regularisation of instrumentality requires that statutory functionaries enactment successful accordance with the instrumentality and wrong the bounds placed upon the workout of their powerfulness by the law.,” the Bench noted.
