The goods were improperly detained by the Customs Authority and only after 100 (hundred) days after the operation was registered, its parameterization occurred to gray channel customs conference due to suspicions of under-invoicing.

However, it is well established that such irregularity does not warrant its submission to the special inspection procedure, and since this procedure was initiated without any plausible basis or justification, in utter disregard for the current legal framework, the goods could not have any other destination than release.

In the report, the Judge of the 1st Panel acknowledged that the contested retention was unjustified and, moreover, lacked sufficient grounds to justify its classification under the gray channel of customs clearance, since it was also not clear to the company what the possible irregularities were that supported the Customs Authority's allegations.

Extract from the Minutes of the Virtual Session: I certify that the 1st Panel, upon reviewing the case file above, rendered the following decision: THE 1ST PANEL DECIDED, UNANIMOUSLY, TO GRANT THE INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL.

Judgment: Having reviewed and considered these proceedings, in which the parties are as indicated above, the Honorable First Panel of the Federal Regional Court of the 4th Region decided, unanimously, to grant the interlocutory appeal, in accordance with the report, votes, and judgment notes that form an integral part of this judgment.

Therefore, it is necessary to reiterate the importance of consulting a specialized legal firm, precisely to prevent anything from hindering companies' right to obtain their goods, since, often, the continuation of imports ends up being mistakenly prevented by the Customs Authority, which can even lead to considerable expenses arising from storage.

For more information, contact our team!

Decision commented by Gian Lucca Jorri, Lawyer, Area of Expertise: Customs Law and Tax Law, OAB (Brazilian Bar Association): 404.759.