The Delhi High Court recently clarified that when goods of foreign origin are sold by intentionally mislabelling them as being of Indian origin, such conduct runs counter to the public interest and the ‘Made In India’ Scheme, and hence upholds the seizure of such goods and their provisional release only subject to the stipulated conditions.
The Division Bench comprising Justice Pratibha M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain observed that the petitioner’s claim of the goods being locally manufactured is contradicted by the foreign-origin labels affixed on the products, and therefore, such mislabelling misleads consumers and runs counter to the public interest and ‘Made in India’ policy, even if those goods are domestic.
Since the petitioner failed to submit proper invoices and the seizure involved a substantial quantity, the Bench concluded that there is no ground to interfere with the Customs communication regarding provisional release. The Bench, however, added that the petitioner is free to join the investigation and pursue appellate remedies u/s 128 of the Customs Act, 1962.
Briefly, this case pertains to seizure of 4,99,020 units of mobile tempered glass found at a girls’ PG in Karol Bagh during a Customs search, which bore ‘Made in China’ labels and were suspected to be illegally imported. The petitioner claimed the goods were locally purchased and manufactured in India, and that the labels were affixed only for pricing advantage. The Customs Department valued the goods at over Rs 56 lakhs and allowed provisional release on submission of bonds and a bank guarantee. The petitioner sought a waiver stating inability to pay and denying any import activity, which was rejected. The petitioner, therefore, challenged the communication permitting provisional release of goods with direction to join the investigation.
Appearances:
Advocate Omkar Kushwaha, for the Petitioner/ Taxpayer
Advocate Shubham Tyagi, for the Respondent/ Revenue
