Customs Directed to Refrain From Repeatedly Resorting to Coercive Measures During Investigation

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

Customs exemption
Case Details: Advantek Fuel Systems Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) (2025) 27 Centax 326 (Del.)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

  • Prathiba M. Singh & Dharmesh Sharma, JJ.
  • Ms Anjali Jha Manish, S/Shri Priyadarshi Manish, Shreyansh Kushwaha, Jatin Kumar Gaur, Paras Aneja & Aman Ahluwalia, Advs., for the Petitioner.
  • S/Shri Aditya Singla, SSC, Rahul Jain, Ritwik Saha & Umang Mishra, Advs., for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The assessee, engaged in the development of CNG/LPG conversion systems, imported specific CNG kit components in 2017 and availed of the exemption under Notification No. 50/2017-Customs, dated 30-06-2017. Subsequently, this exemption was rescinded on 31st March 2022 through Notification No. 2/2022-Customs dated 01-02-2022. Initially, the Customs Department did not object to the exemption claim. However, an investigation was later initiated to reassess the validity of the exemption. The petitioner was informed that the investigation had been closed, but a summons was issued a year later, contradicting the prior closure notice and indicating the continuation of the inquiry. During the investigation, the petitioner and its directors were alleged to be non-cooperative, prompting the Department to provisionally attach the petitioner’s bank accounts. The petitioner challenged this action by filing a writ petition before the Delhi High Court.

High Court Held

The Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that the Customs Department must assess whether sufficient grounds exist to justify the withdrawal of the exemption under Notification No. 50/2017-Customs dated 30th June 2017. If such grounds are found, a show cause notice must be issued within three months. The Court further ruled that coercive measures, including repeated summonses and the freezing of bank accounts, must not be undertaken without proceeding with adjudication. Recognizing the adverse impact on business continuity, the Court directed the immediate unfreezing of the petitioner’s bank accounts while allowing an ad hoc deposit of Rs. 3 crores under protest.

List of Notifications Cited

Leave Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Stories
NCLT-Approved Resolution Plan Binds All—Even Non-Participants | SC

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

May 7, 2025

CBIC Revises Travel Guidelines for ICP Attari Border Movement

Customs • News • Statutory Scope

May 7, 2025

No Interest If Duty Delay Due to System Glitch | HC

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

May 6, 2025

India Adds New Zealand & Madagascar to CMAA Customs Pact

Customs • News • Statutory Scope

May 5, 2025

CBIC Notification 33/2025 Customs Tariff Values—Effective May 1, 2025

Customs • News • Statutory Scope

May 2, 2025

Customs Duty Exemption Withdrawal – Notification 26/2025

Customs • News • Statutory Scope

May 2, 2025

SC Upholds CTH 6813 89 00 Friction Materials Classification

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

May 1, 2025

CBIC Updates Bank List for Duty-Free Import of Gold and Silver for FY 2025–26

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

April 30, 2025

Minor Delay No Ground to Exclude Petitioners in Anti-Dumping Probe | HC

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

April 29, 2025

HC Upholds Rejection of Drawback Claim Due to Unexplained Delay by Exporter

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

April 29, 2025