Case Details: Canadian Speciality Vinyls vs. Commissioner of Customs, Noida (2026) 39 Centax 189 (Tri.-All)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Ajay Sharma, Member (J) & C.J. Mathew, Member (T)
- Shri Priyadarshi Manish, Adv., for the Appellant.
- Shri Manish Raj, AC (AR), for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The appellants had stocks of wrap knitted fabric seized under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962, during an investigation into alleged short-payment of customs duty. One importer secured the differential duty through a substantial cash deposit, while the other furnished a full-value bond with bank guarantee covering duty and interest. The department required additional bank guarantees to permit release of the goods. The matter was accordingly placed before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT).
CESTAT Held
The CESTAT held that the seized wrap knitted fabric was commercial in nature, neither prohibited nor subject to import conditions, and that the interests of the exchequer were adequately protected through the cash deposit and the bank guarantee. The Tribunal observed that requiring additional guarantees would be unreasonable. Accordingly, the goods were directed to be released on full value bonds without any further bank guarantees, in accordance with Section 110A read with Sections 110 and 143 of the Customs Act, 1962.
