He said he was arrested and handcuffed at the scene and his car seized.
He said he had bought the cherished car from a large auction company, via a middleman, last year and spent "a lot of time and money" on the vehicle.
He said: "I ordered parts from Ferrari and had them fitted by a Ferrari approved garage in Birmingham.
"The police told me they did not believe that the car was mine and that I had to prove ownership.
"I have been trying to get my car back ever since, trying to prove that it did not include stolen parts and that I was the owner.
"Then we go to Birmingham Crown Court this morning and find that the car has been destroyed.
"But I did not know anything about that and I can't believe they have destroyed my car."
West Midlands Police confirmed that officers had stopped Khan on April 5.
It also confirmed that the force had applied to a judge at Birmingham Crown Court for an amendment to an existing asset restraining order which resulted in the Ferrari no longer being a restrained asset.
Zahid Khan. Photo/Facebook
A spokeswoman said the car was crushed last week because it had no valid insurance and was a Category B vehicle - which are officially classed as unroadworthy, meaning the shell has to be destroyed.
After learning his car's fate, Khan expressed his anger. He said: "I love supercars and have owned a number of them and loved this car.
"I bought it to do it up as a hobby and when I finished it was worth over £200,000 ($365,213)."
The businessman was exposed as a rogue landlord in December after forcing tenants out of his luxury Birmingham home.
He was ordered to carry out 150 hours of community service after forcing out six professionals who had rented his sprawling Yardley Wood Road property in Moseley.
He later appealed the conviction, turning up to court in the white Ferrari 458 Spider, which he claims is worth more than £200,000 ($365,213).
He parked the eye-catching vehicle on the pavement outside Birmingham Crown Court in Newton Street during the appeal hearing.
That hearing upheld three of the charges - interfering with the peace and comfort of tenants, failing to provide adequate smoke alarms, and failing to obtain an HMO licence for the property.
But the court dismissed the other three - failing to ensure the property was kept in good and clean decorative repair, failure to ensure the internal structure of the property was maintained in good repair, and failure to ensure that any fixtures, fittings or appliances were maintained in good repair.
Following the appeal, Khan was ordered to pay an extra £2,000 ($3,600) on top of the previous £5,700 ($10,400) he was told to pay.
