2025 (7) TMI 1351 - HC - Customs

Seeking directions to the Respondents to unconditionally release the gold bars and to quash the detention receipt - non-service of order - petitioner was informed that an order would be passed directing the amount of duty to be deposited however no order has been received till date - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - The admitted position is that no SCN has been issued till date in this matter. This Court vide a number of decisions including Amit Kumar v. The Commissioner of Customs 2025 (2) TMI 385 - DELHI HIGH COURT and Mr Makhinder Chopra vs Commissioner of Customs New Delhi 2025 (3) TMI 19 - DELHI HIGH COURT has held that in absence of an SCN being issued the detention is liable to be quashed and the seized goods shall be released. The Petitioner would be entitled to release of the gold bars subject to payment of the customs duty as applicable - let the Petitioner appear before the concerned Customs Authority on 30th July 2025 at 11 30 AM. The Customs Department shall hear the Petitioner and pass an order informing the Petitioner as to how much customs duty is to be deposited - Petition disposed off.

Summary

The Delhi High Court, through Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, adjudicated a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeking release of gold bars seized at IGI Airport and quashing of detention receipt No. 39923 dated 26th December 2021. The Petitioner, a Saudi Arabia resident, contended the gold was for personal use and no Show Cause Notice (SCN) was issued. Relying on precedents including *Amit Kumar v. The Commissioner of Customs* and *Mr Makhinder Chopra vs Commissioner of Customs*, the Court held that "in absence of an SCN being issued, the detention is liable to be quashed and the seized goods shall be released." The Court ordered the Petitioner to appear before Customs on 30th July 2025 for determination of customs duty payable, with no redemption fine or penalty imposed. Due to delay and non-issuance of SCN, the Petitioner was directed to pay 50% of applicable warehouse charges. The petition was disposed accordingly, emphasizing the necessity of issuing an SCN before detention and adjudication.