ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed for a Mandamus to direct the

Respondents 1 and 2 herein to forthwith provisionally release the four consignments of old and used digital multifunction copying, printing and scanning machines of A3 size, vide Bills of Entry Nos.(1) 5413583 dated

13.09.2021, (2) 5474613 dated 17.09.2021, (3) 5559768 dated 23.09.2021 and (4) 5560004 dated 23.09.2021 on payment of applicable total Customs Duty on the enhanced value as appraised by the above Chartered Engineers’ M/s.Supreme Techno Associates Private Limited, Chennai vide their Inspection Reports and Valuation Certificates Nos.(1) STA/IR/O&VC/C-395/2021 – 2022 dated 22.09.2021, (2) STA/IR/O & VC/C-429/2021 – 2022 dated 06.10.2021 (3) STA/IR/O&VC/C-430/2021-2022 dated 07.10.2021 & (4) STA/IR/O&VC/C-435/2021-2022 dated 08.10.2021, in line with the directions of this Hon’ble Court in W.P.Nos.8574 of 2020 and seven others batch dated 25.01.2021 as upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India vide, Order dated

11.08.2021 in SLP.No.7565 of 2021 batch.

2. The petitioner is seeking provisional release of the goods which are admittedly prohibited under Section 110 A of the Customs Act, 1962. 3. The petitioner had originally filed four Bill of Entries. The details of the Numbers, Date, Invoice value and the Value adopted in the Bill of

Entries are as under:-

4. Earlier this Court by its order dated 16.06.2023 had directed the

Department to release the goods covered by the Bill of Entry No.5413583 dated 13.09.2021 and Bill of Entry No.5474613 dated 17.09.2021.

The operative portion of the said order reads as under:-

“Heard Mr.B.Kumar, learned Senior Counsel, for the petitioner and Mrs.Hema Murali Krishnan, learned Senior

Standing Counsel, for the Customs Department.

2. The prayer in the writ petition is for a mandamus seeking release of consignments in four bills of entry. After some hearing, the cause of action is bifurcated into two.

3. As regards bills of entry (i) 5413583 dated 13.09.2021 and (ii)5474613 dated 17.09.2021, both learned counsel would accede to the position that an identical request for release was considered in the case of M/s. BE Office Automation Product Limited and The Commissioner of Customs and others [W.P.No.24911 of 2022 dated

06.06.2023]. The order reads thus:-

“The petitioner seeks a certiorified mandamus calling for and quashing order dated 17.08.2022 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Customs / R2. It consequentially seeks a direction to R2 to forthwith provisionally release used Multifunction Digital Print and Copying Machines in BE Nos. 8286002/02.10.18; 8467841/15.10.18, 7884546/03.09.18 and

7917595/05.09.18 (MFDs / goods in question).

2. The petitioner relies on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Delhi Photocopiers v the Commissioner of Customs dated 11.08.2021 in S.L.P.(c) No. 7565 of 2021.

3. Though a counter has been filed by the respondents objecting to the averments in the writ affidavit, learned Standing Counsel would point out that there has been a shift in the legal position and pre and post 17.09.2021. Prior to 17.09.2021, import of goods in question was 'restricted' whereas post 17.09.2021, such imposition stands prohibited. The judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.L.P.(C) No. 7565 of 2020 dealt with a challenge by the respondents to orders of this Court whereunder directions had been given for provisionally release goods similar to the goods in question, on terms, and complete the process of adjudication within a fixed time frame. In that context, the Hon'ble Court directs provisional release referring to several other orders passed by the Hon'ble Court along similar lines. The order extracted below:-

“We have heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner(s) and Mr. N. Venkataraman, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the respondent(s) at length.

On 05.07.2021, this Court had issued notice in these matters. Despite the fact that the matter was pending before this