Modine Thermal Systems Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Customes Chennai II

¶1

WP No. 20173 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 03-03-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ

¶6

WP No.20173 of 2025

¶7

Modine Thermal Systems Private Limited, Represented by its Authorized Signatory, R.Annaporani, Assistant ManagerIndirect Taxation, K7, Sipcot Industrial Village, Mambakkam Village, Sunguvarchatram 602 106.

¶8

..Petitioner

¶9

Vs

¶10

Commissioner of Customs, Chennai-II, No.60, Custom House, Rajaji Salai, Chennai 600 001.

¶11

Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Group 5N, No.60, Custom House, Rajaji Salai, Chennai 600 001.

¶12

..Respondents

¶13

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to re assess the Bill of Entry No.6788837 dated 22.12.2021 as requested in letters dated 25.01.2023 and 16.10.2023 so as to reflect the IGST and interest paid by the petitioner and enable the petitioner to avail Input Tax Credit of IGST paid in respect of the imported goods.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.Raghavan Ramabadran For Respondents: Mr.R.P.Pragadish Senior Standing Counsel

¶15

Page1 of 5

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

WP No. 20173 of 2025

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The present writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of Mandamus to direct second respondent to amend Bill of Entry No.6788837 dated 22.12.2021 to reflect the factum of payment of integrated goods and service tax (IGST) and interest by petitioner against the said Bill of Entry.

¶20

Learned counsel for petitioner would submit that the above request was

¶21

made in terms of Section 149 of the Customs Act read with paragraph 2.3 of Circular No.233/27/2024-GST dated 10.09.2024 issued by CBIC. He would also submit that a representation was also been made by petitioner in this regard as early as on 25.01.2023, and the said representation has not been acted upon.

¶22

Learned Senior Standing Counsel for respondents would submit that

¶23

there is some uncertainty as to whether the said representation is available on file or not.

¶24

When this Court suggested that petitioner may submit another set of documents along with a fresh representation before the respondents and that on receipt of such representation, the same could be disposed of, within a period of six weeks, same was agreed to by learned counsel for petitioner and respondents.

¶25

__________ Page2 of 5

¶26

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

WP No. 20173 of 2025

¶28

Heard the counsels and perused the materials available on record.

¶29

In that view of the matter, this court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition with following directions:

¶30

i) It is open to petitioner to submit a fresh representation along with another set of documents before respondents, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶31

ii) If any such representation is made, respondents shall examine the same and pass orders, in accordance with law, after affording petitioner an opportunity of hearing, within a period of six weeks from the date of filing of such representation.

¶32

7. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. There will be no

¶33

order as to costs.

¶34

03-03-2026

¶35

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No MRN

¶36

__________ Page3 of 5

¶37

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis