Dismissed

CART2INDIA Online Retail Private Limited v. Union of India

Karnataka HC20 Nov 2024WP/15789/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an oral order dismissing a writ petition filed by an importer challenging the seizure of goods by customs authorities. The Court, finding that an alternative and efficacious remedy exists under Section 129A of the Customs Act, held the petition non-maintainable at this stage while granting liberty to approach the Appellate Authority.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed with liberty to approach the Appellate Authority; time spent in the writ petition shall be condoned.

CART2INDIA Online Retail Private Limited Vs Union… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:47180 WP No. 15789 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 15789 OF 2024 (T-CUS)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

CART2INDIA ONLINE RETAIL PRIVATE LIMITED, FACILE TOWERS NO. 76, VICTORIA ROAD, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA, INDIA - 560 047, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR. ADIL SALEEM, SON OF MR. SALEEM HABIB, AND AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. ANUPAM DIGHE, ADVOCATE A/W SRI. GRINOFF CHARLES, ADVOCATE AND SRI. GOVIND J.L, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RICAB CHAND K, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by H K HEMA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NO. 137, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110 001.

¶14

SUPERINTENDENT OF CUSTOMS SPECIAL INTELLIGENCE AND INVESTIGATION BRANCH AIRPORT AND AIR CARGO COMPLEX, MENZIES AVIATION BLR INTERNATIONAL AIR CARGO TERMINAL, DEVANAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 300.

¶15

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, AIRPORT AND AIR CARGO COMPLEX,

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:47180 WP No. 15789 of 2024

¶18

MENZIES AVIATION BLR INTERNATIONAL AIR CARGO TERMINAL, DEVANAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 300.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SMT. SHUBHA S, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. ARAVIND KAMATH, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. AKASH B. SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)

¶21

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO HOLD AND DECLARE. THAT THE DETENTION OF THE GOODS COVERED UNDER BILL OF ENTRY NO. 7566789 DATED 28.08.2023 IS BAD IN LAW, AND THE GOODS ARE LIABLE TO BE RELEASED FOR RE-EXPORT TO SUPPLIER AS THERE WAS NO SEIZURE CARRIED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IN TERMS OF SECTION 110(2) OF THE ACT, IN THE FIRST PLACE AND ETC.,

¶22

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

In the instant writ petition, the petitioner has

¶25

challenged the seizure of his goods by respondent Nos.2

¶26

and 3 under the provisions of The Customs Act, 1962 (for short 'Act') and their refusal to release the same pursuant to this request.

¶27

Learned ASG submits that the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 can be challenged by the petitioner before the Appellate Tribunal under Section 129A of the Act and as

¶28

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:47180 WP No. 15789 of 2024

¶29

the petitioner is having an alternative and efficacious remedy, it is prayed that the writ petition be dismissed.

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioner is not in a position

¶31

to rebut the availability of an alternative and efficacious remedy to the petitioner.

¶32

For the aforementioned reasons, the writ petition is hereby dismissed reserving the liberty to the petitioner to approach the Appellate Authority in the manner known to law. If the petitioner were to challenge the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 before the Appellate Authority, the time spent by the petitioner pursuing the instant writ petition shall be condoned.

¶33

It is needless to state that the petitioner is having the liberty to urge all contentions before the Appellate Authority.

¶34

SD/(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

¶35

PHM/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 81

CART2INDIA Online Retail Private Limited v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

CART2INDIA Online Retail Private Limited v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Lokappa Gowda K Vs Smt. Shakunthala Rai

M Naveen Kumar Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.Chunche Gowda Vs Sri.S. Nagaraju

Smt Pyarijan Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Lakshminarasamma Vs the Asst. Commissioner

The President Vs the State of Karnataka