M/s. Midsea International Private Limited Vs the Union of India

M/S. MIDSEA INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED, , OFFICE AT FLAT NO. 1-14/2, RAJUGARIBEEDU, PAYAKARAOPETA, YELAMANCHILI MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR-CUMAUTHORI SED SIGNATORY, BATHINA MAHESWARA RAO, S/O. NAGESWARA RAO, AGED 47 YEARS, R/O. PAYAKARAOPETA, YELAMANCHILI MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH

¶12

...PETITIONER

¶13

AND

¶14

THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI.

¶15

THE DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE, 7TH FLOOR, D BLOCK, I.P.BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE, NEW DELHI. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR.

¶16

THE DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE, , REGIONAL UNIT, VIJAYAWADA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, REGIONAL OFFICE AT 10- 56, 5TH FLOOR, ABOVE CANARA BANK, ASHOK NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA-7.

¶17

THE INSPECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE,

¶18

Page 2 of 8

¶19

KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶20

CUSTOMS HOUSE, PORT AREA, VISAKHAPATNAM, COMMISSIONERATE OF CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

¶21

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER/ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CUSTOMS HOUSE, KAKINADA PORT AREA, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶22

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CUSTOMS HOUSE, KAKINADA PORT AREA, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶23

THE KAKINADA CONTAINER TERMINAL KCT, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶24

THE KAKINADA SEA PORT LIMITED, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶25

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶26

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased tomay be pleased to issue a Writ or Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing summons under Section 108 of Customs Act, 1962 dated 17.07.2025 and also in obstructing the release of the consignment i.e., vegetable waste Broken Cashew Nut Pieces and Residues which are perishable in nature by the 3rd and the 4th respondents in-spite of all clearances from the respondent authorities as well as after of out of charge (OoC) and gate pass in Gate Pass No.issuance 2064635750 dated 08.07.2025 and also seizing the personal computer of the petitioner on 17.07.2025 as well as retrieving the personal mobile data by the 3rd respondent dated 19.07.2025 as illegal, arbitrary and also oppose to Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India as well as oppose to all of justice consequentially direct the respondents to release the cannons consignment i.e., vegetable waste Broken Cashew Nut Pieces and Residues which are perishable in nature of the petitioner company in bill of entry No. 2745054 dated 19.06.2025 and in Gate Pass No. 2064635750 dated 08.07.2025 forthwith by suspending the operation of the summons of the 3rd respondent

¶27

Page 3 of 8

¶28

in Ref.No. DRI/HZU/VJRRU/48/INT-07/2025 dated 17.07.2025 as well as to release the seizer of the personal computer of the petitioner which was seized by the 4th respondent forthwith and to pass such

¶29

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶30

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the Respondents to renewal the petitioner passport bearing No. Z8119493, Vide File No. VS1075297041925 for a minimum period of five (5) years within a time-frame, pending disposal of the above writ petition, in the interest of Justice and pass

¶31

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶32

1.V SAI KUMAR

¶33

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶34

1.V VENKATA NAGA RAJU(CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL)

¶35

2.SANTHI CHANDRA(Sr.STANDING COUNSEL FOR DRI AND DGGI)

¶36

The Court made the following:

¶37

Page 4 of 8

¶38

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

¶39

&

¶40

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA

¶41

WRIT PETITION No.18779 of 2025

¶42

ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Battu Devanand)

¶43

This writ petition is filed against the action of respondent No.3 in issuing summons dated 17.07.2025 under Section 108 of Customs Act, 1962 and also in obstructing the release of the consignment i.e. vegetable waste (Broken Cashew Nut Pieces and Residues which are perishable in nature) by the respondents 3 & 4, in spite of all clearances from the respondent authorities as well as after issuance of out of charge and gate pass in Gate Pass No.2064635750, dated 17.07.2025, as well as retrieving the personal mobile data by respondent No.3 dated 19.07.2025, as illegal and arbitrary and contrary to Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.

¶44

The case of the petitioner is that he involved in import and export business under the name and style as Midsea International Private Limited, which was approved by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs. For the process of import business, the petitioner engaged an authorized agent namely Dhanishta Shipping and Logistics Private Limited. The petitioner made a request to Nguyen Phat Binh Phuoc Import and Export Company Limited, Viet Nam, to import and export vegetable waste broken Cashew Nut Pieces and Residues, which are perishable in nature and product is utilized for the

¶45

Page 5 of 8

¶46

purpose of cattle feed as well as in the poultries. As per request of the petitioner, the import and export company at Viet Nam exported the same through petitioner’s authorized agent. The container arrived at Kakinada Sea Port on 17.06.2025 at about 08.:14 hours. After fulfilling all the formalities, respondents 5 to 7 requested to release the consignment on furnishing a TEST Bond for an amount of Rs.45,00,031/- by the petitioner i.e. after payment of IGST and also other charges to a tune of Rs.8,31,053/-. Thereafter, a gate pass was prepared by respondents 5 to 7 and 8 on 08.07.2025. After clearing all the formalities, while the petitioner was about to shift the goods from the port, respondent No.4 along with staff surprised the place at 18:25 to 19:11 hours on 08.07.2025 and directed to stop the movement of containers and detained the containers, without any notice. The said action of the respondent authorities was challenged in W.P.No.17691 of 2025 dated 11.07.2025. The said writ petition has been withdrawn. Thereafter, respondent No.4, on 17.07.2025, issued summons to the petitioner to appear before him on 19.07.2025. Respondent No.3 conducted an enquiry on 19.07.2025 and the petitioner also answered all the questions. The present writ petition is filed challenging the summons dated 17.07.2025 issued by respondent No.4 on the ground that the petitioner imported Cashew Nut Pieces/Shoot axis, but it is not the cashew. During the pendency of this writ petition, till now, several developments took place.

¶47

Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents has filed a memo along with a copy of the show-cause notice dated 19.09.2025

¶48

Page 6 of 8

¶49

and the same is placed on record. Relying on the said show-cause notice, learned Standing Counsel would submit that against the import of misdeclared goods by the petitioner vide Bill of Entry No.2745054, dated 19.06.2025 and for violation of the provisions of Customs Act, 1962, a showcause notice has been issued by respondent No.3. She further submits that if the petitioner is able to submit his explanation to the show-cause notice, the respondent authorities will consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶50

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner also accepted that the petitioner received notice dated 19.09.2025 issued by respondent No.3 Office and they are ready to submit explanation immediately. He requested to direct the respondent No.3 to pass orders at an early date, considering the explanation of petitioner, in view of the fact that the goods involved in this case are perishable in nature.

¶51

In view of the above factual position, in our considered view, it is appropriate and reasonable to dispose of the writ petition, without going into merits of the case, permitting the petitioner to submit explanation to the showcause notice dated 19.09.2025, as expeditiously as possible, without waiting for 30 days time given in the show-cause notice. On receipt of the explanation, respondent No.6 shall consider it and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of two (02) weeks, after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶52

Page 7 of 8

¶53