Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2017 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 704 - HC - CustomsRelease of seized gold - smuggling - principles of natural justice - petitioner's case is that no notice has been served upon him within six months of the said seizure. Such notice is mandatory u/s 110 of the CA, 1962, in compliance with Section 124 and in the manner prescribed in Section 153 of the Act - Revenue however, contends that a SCN was issued to the petitioner on 05.02.2016, which was well within the stipulated six months from the date of seizure of the goods; the notice was posted through Speed Post on the same date. Also, a copy of the SCN was also pasted on the Notice Board of the customs house in compliance with Section 153 of the Act; therefore, it would be deemed to be due notice - Held that: - not only have the custom authorities failed to provide proof regarding service of notice, but also their counter affidavit is unsupported by any material proof of service - there has been no initiation of any formal enquiry or proceedings by the Customs Authorities after the seizure of the goods on 14.08.2015 - there is no deeming provision of service having been effected under Section 153(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. As stated in para 7 (supra) the records of service by affixing the notice on the notice board of the customs house would arise only in the event that the notice “cannot be served in the manner prescribed under the said clause” as laid down under Section 153 (a) - Therefore, in terms of the unambiguous language of Section 110(2), in the absence of notice within six months of the seizure of the goods, they would have to be released back to the petitioner - petition allowed - decided in favor of petitioner.
|