- (1.) This petition has been filed with a prayer for quashing seizure memo dated 5.7.2006, Annexure P. 21, whereby certain containers of Hydrogenated Vegetable Oil (Vanaspati) imported by the petitioner, were seized. Further prayer is for quashing letter dated 9.8.2006, Annexure P. 45 by the Joint Director, Revenue Intelligence informing the petitioner that samples of certain containers had failed in specifications laid down for Vanaspati under Appendix-B of Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 and, thus, the goods mentioned in the Bill of Entry did not conform to the description given and, therefore, the same was liable to be re-exported or destroyed, thereby request of the petitioner for provisional release of the goods was rejected. Prayer has also been made for a direction for awarding to the petitioner demurrage, detention charges and interest for illegal detention.
(2.) Case of the petitioner is that it is a private limited company and imported Hydrogenated Vegetable Oil (Vanaspati) from Sri Lanka under the Free Trade Agreement. It filed Bill of Entry for custom clearance. The Customs authorities took samples and sent for analysis. Samples were found conforming to the standards laid down under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short, 'the PFA Act')- On 27.6.2006, when the petitioner tried to take delivery of the containers, the Customs authorities refused permission. On 29.6.2006, respondent No. 5 served summons under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short, 'the Customs Act') on the partner of the petitioner-company. Thereafter, goods were sealed on 5.7.2006, alleging violation of the provisions of the Customs Act.
(3.) On 24.7.2006, the Director General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) made an amendment in the policy under which import of Vanaspati from Sri Lanka was to be allowed in cases where the Bill of Lading was 1st of June, 2006 or before. On 4.8.2006, partner of the petitioner was informed that three out of seven samples had failed. Vide letter dated 9.8.2006, the petitioner was informed that seven samples did not conform to the PFA Act and the said containers were liable to be confiscated. Remaining five containers were proposed to be released subject to fulfilment of certain conditions. The present writ petition was filed on 23.8.2006.;