vehemently opposes the prayer for provisional release and contends that:
i. Adjudication proceedings in respect of the seized goods are
pending.
ii. Provisional release at this stage would prejudice the interest of
the revenue.
3
iii. The goods shall be provisionally released in terms of the
conditions laid down in the circular dated 16th August, 2017
particularly as per para 2.1 and 2.2.
iv. If the goods are provisionally released in that event the same shall
be sold in the presence of the concerned authorities.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of
the records, this Court finds that the petitioner has been able to make out a
prima facie case for interference at this stage. The perishable nature of the
goods and the delay in adjudication since 15.5.24 are material consideration.
