Court fines official for unfairly targeting specific importers.
In a significant verdict addressing administrative fairness, the Delhi High Court has taken a strict stance against the Customs Department for unfairly targeting specific businesses. The court imposed a cost of Rs 25,000 on the department, explicitly stating that the amount should be recovered from the salary of the Assistant Commissioner of Customs involved.
The bench, led by Justices Prathiba Singh and Shail Jain, criticized the authorities for "harassing" a firm attempting to import goods declared as body massagers. The dispute arose after the Customs Department filed a review petition challenging an earlier court order from October 30. That previous order had directed the provisional release of the seized goods, highlighting that the department could not selectively block shipments when other companies were importing identical items without issues.
The Core Dispute: Wellness vs. Prohibition
The conflict began when the Customs authorities seized a shipment from an importer named Techsync. The officials argued that the company had mislabeled sex toys as "body massagers" to bypass a 1964 notification that prohibits the import of "obscene products."
In their review petition, the department introduced new technical arguments. They claimed that the products required a license from the Drug Controller General of India (DCGI) and that the importers failed to provide an Extended Producer Responsibility certificate under the Battery Waste Management Rules, 2022.
However, the importers countered these claims by referencing the Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation’s own FAQs. They argued that massagers intended for general wellness and soothing purposes—rather than therapeutic medical use—do not fall under these strict medical regulations. Furthermore, they clarified that the battery waste certification could be applied for after the goods were released.
Double Standards Exposed
The turning point in the hearing came when the High Court questioned the consistency of the Customs Department's actions. The bench asked whether similar products imported by major third-party players, such as the makers of Durex, were subjected to the same scrutiny and seizures.
The department admitted that shipments from these larger companies were cleared and permitted for import.
Noting this discrepancy, the court observed that uniformity was completely absent in how the policy was being applied. The judges remarked that the department was "clearly harassing the petitioners for no reason" by blocking their consignments while waving others through. Consequently, the court dismissed the department's review plea and penalized the Assistant Commissioner for the unnecessary litigation.
Earlier, the court had also directed the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) to hold consultations to draft a modern, uniform policy regarding the import of sex toys and massagers that aligns with contemporary times.
