IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7981 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO.7981 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO.7981 OF 2007 Jitendra Manek )..Petitioner Versus Union of India & Ors. )..Respondents ---- Mr.Vikram Nankani with Mr.M.R.Baya for the petitioner. Mr.S.S.Pakale with Mr.Y.R.Mishra for the respondents. ---- Coram : F.I.REBELLO & Coram : F.I.REBELLO & Coram : F.I.REBELLO & R.S.MOHITE,JJ R.S.MOHITE,JJ R.S.MOHITE,JJ Date : 18.01.2008. PC 1. Rule. Heard forthwith. 2. In the present case the respondents had seized the petitioner’s goods in exercise of the powers under Section 110-A on the ground that the goods have been mis-described and under valued. There is no dispute that the goods have been imported in the regular course of import. It is also not in dispute that no ozone depleting substances have been imported alongwith imported goods by the petitioner. The only contention advanced on behalf of the respondents is that the goods which are imported infact and for all purposes are knock down split air conditioners. It is not disputed by them that and : 2 : one of the main component which contains the ozone depleting substances what is required for split air conditioner has not been imported alongwith the goods presently imported. 3. In our opinion in these circumstances, the goods can be provisionally released by issuing the following directions :- (i) The petitioner to pay the duty on the value as declared by the petitioner; (ii) The petitioner to pay 20% of the provisional duty to be assessed by the respondents ; (iii) The balance of provisional duty to be secured by a bond. 4. Rule made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs. (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J)