SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(CESTAT) 3211

CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI REGIONAL BENCH - COURT NO. 4


Customs Miscellaneous Application No. 86064 of 2026 (on behalf of Respondent)

In Customs Appeal No. 86429 of 2026

[Arising out of Order C. No. VIII(Cus)25-29/SIIB/2026-27 dated 09.07.2016 issued by the Commissioner of Customs, Nagpur.]


M Y Impex .… Appellant

M-111, Mittal GRD Sonaji Nagar Near Lajwab Hotel, Mittal New Road

Mumbra, Kalyan, Thane, Maharashtra – 400 612.

Versus

Commissioner of Customs, …. Respondent

Nagpur Customs Commissionerate

GST Bhavan

Telangkhedi Road, Civil Lines Nagpur – 440 001.


Appearance:

Shri Ashwini Kumar, Advocates for the Appellant

Shri Shyam Raj Prasad, Special Counsel for the Respondent


CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. AJAY SHARMA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

HON’BLE MR. M.M. PARTHIBAN, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)


FINAL ORDER NO. A/86080/2026


Date of Hearing: 18.08.2026

Date of Decision: 02.09.2026


(Order pronounced in open court on 02.09.2026)


(AJAY SHARMA)

MEMBER (JUDICIAL)


(M.M. PARTHIBAN)

MEMBER (TECHNICAL)


Sinha

Per: BENCH

This appeal has been filed by M/s M Y Impex, Mumbai (herein after, referred to as ‘the appellant’, for short) assailing the order C. No. VIII(Cus) 25-29/SIIB/2026-27 dated 09.07.2016 (herein after, referred to as ‘the impugned order’, for short) passed by the Commissioner of Customs,Nagpur.

2. In this appeal filed by the appellant, a prayer has been made for the following:

“(a) set aside the Order bearing C. No. VIII(Cus)25-29/SIIB/2026-27, DIN: 20260766OJ0000999F56, dated 09.07.2016 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Nagpur, rejecting the Appellant’s application dated 08.06.2026 for provisional release of the seized goods withconsequential relief(s);

(b) pass such other and further orders as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

3.1 Brief facts of the case leading to this appeal are summarized below. The appellant M/s M Y Impex, Mumbai is a proprietorship firm; Shri Mohamed Sajid Mohamed Yasin Ansari is the proprietor of the said firm. They had obtained Import-Export Code (IEC) DBAPM9281F from Licensing/ Regional Authority (RA), Mumbai of the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) on 08.09.2023 for transacting import/export transactions, since the same is a mandatory requirement under Paragraph 1.13 of the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP). On 23.09.2023 through a general power of attorney executed by the said Shri Mohamed Sajid Mahamed Yasin Ansari, proprietor of appellant firm inter alia, he appointed one Shri Asif Aziz Daravesh as his power of attorney holder for conducting the activity of import of all kinds of ‘Dry Dates’ (Wet & Dried), all kinds of food stuff to be purchased from any foreign country as per the power attorney holder’s wish, on a profit sharing arrangement of 5% for Shri Mohamed SajidMahamed Yasin Ansari and 95% for Shri Asif Aziz Daravesh.

3.2 The appellant firm had imported a consignment of 2,85,000 kgs. of ‘Dry Dates’ stuffed in ten containers procured from M/s Tawarikh Trading L.L.C., ER1, Office-Off 214, Al Mararr, Dubai, United Arab Emirates (UAE) declaring in the Bill of Entry (B/E) Nos. 3907110 and 3907112 both dated 18.08.2025, the classification of goods under Customs Tariff Item (CTI) 0804 1030 and the country of origin as “United Arab Emirates (UAE)’ for clearance of imported goods from customs control at M/s Halcon Inland Container Depot (ICD), Janori, Nashik. Though the commercial invoice dated 09.08.2025 indicated the final destination as Nhava Sheva, the Bill of Lading dated 10.08.2025 indicated the port of discharge as Nhava Shevaand the final delivery place as ICD, Janori.

3.3 The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Mumbai Zonal Unit (DRI) had developed a specific intelligence that ‘Dry Dates’ are originating in Pakistan, and these have been transported from Pakistan to UAE, Dubai, Jebel Ali port and subsequently on transhipment of such Pakistan originating goods by re-stuffing the very same goods in different container, these goods have been incorrectly shown as originating from UAE, in order to circumvent the prohibition imposed for import of goods from Pakistan in terms of the DGFT Notification No.06/2025-26 dated 02.05.2025. On the basis of said intelligence, DRI had sent e-mail communication to the custodian of ICD, Jaloni M/s Halcon on 18.08.2025 that upon physical receipt of such imported goods on transhipment from JNPT, Nhava Sheva, those goods are required to put on hold, as the same were required to be examined by DRI. On receipt of such goods on 30.08.2025 (5 containers) and on 31.08.2025 (another 5 containers), examination of the imported goods was undertaken by DRI vide Panchnama proceedings dated 02.09.2025. Further, enquiries were also conducted with the shipping lines, Vessel Operators, shipping agents, C&F agents, terminal operators etc., for submission of documents relating to such importation of consignments. As a result of the said enquiry, it was reported that M/s Noman Ahmad Shipp

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top