9911796707
TMI Blog1970 (10) TMI 29X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... radios, 2 binoculars and 18 empty bottles used as containers for foreign liquor along with a few documents. The petitioner was not then in the house; and the search and recovery were made in the presence of his son. A statement was recorded from him by the Inspector on the spot; and subsequently on 8-8-1969 the petitioner also gave a statement regarding the articles seized from the premises in his possession. This was followed by the usual investigation by the Central Excise Department, and a notice Ext. P-1 dated 12-1-1970 to the petitioner from the first respondent the Collector of Customs and Central Excise stating that it appeared to him that the articles seized were of foreign origin liable for confiscation under Section 111 (d) of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etitioner again by his letter, Ext. P-7 dated 18-5-1970, applied for a true copy of the above order, to which the first respondent replied by letter, Ext. P-8 dated 1-6-1970, reiterating his previous position, namely that he has on 2-2-1970 extended the time by one month from 4-2-1970. The petitioner protested to the above communication by his letter, Ext. P-9 dated 5-6-1970; and he again requested for a true copy of the above order. On 8-7-1970, the first respondent issued a notice, Ext. P-11, posting the case for hearing to 1-8-1970, and informed the petitioner that if he failed to appear with all documents and other evidence in support of his defence, the case will be considered and disposed of ex parte. Thereupon the petitioner filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Where any goods are seized under sub-section (1) and no notice in respect thereof is given under Clause (a) of Section 124 within six months on the seizure of the goods, the goods shall be returned to the person from whose possession they were seized: Provided that the aforesaid period of six months may, on sufficient cause being shown, be extended by the Collector of Customs for a period not exceeding six months. (3) x x &n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion passed or any summons or notice issued under this Act, shall be served — (a) by tendering the order, decision, summons or notice or sending it by registered post to the person for whom it is intended or to his agent; or (b) if the order, decision, summons or notice cannot be served in the manner provided in clause (a), by affixing it on the notice board of the customs house." The above provision shows that a notice issued under the Act can be served by sending it by registered post to the person for whom it is intended or to his agent, and that if it cannot be served in that manner it can be served by affixing on the notice board of the Customs Office. It gives an indication that in giving notice under the Act receipt of the same by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iod for issuing the show cause notice under Sec. 110 (2) of the Act by 4 months. Before the expiry of that period another application was made by the Investigating Officer on 3-1-1964. That application however happened to be ordered by the Collector only on 20-2-1964; and he passed another ex parte order extending the time by two months. It is not very clear from the decision what exactly was the relief sought for by the appellant in that case. The contention was that the above two orders extending the period under Section 110 (2) of the Act was bad, as they were passed without hearing the appellant. Sinha, C. J. who delivered the judgment of the Court in dealing with the above contention stated as follows :- "As long as the period of issu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e period and after the expiry of the period. I am unable to find any scope for the differentiation in the light of the language used in the section. All that the section says is that the extension can be made only "on sufficient cause being shown", whether the extension is before the expiry of the period or after its expiry, it would always affect the right of the person, whose goods has been seized. In the former case, he would have got the goods returned to him after the expiry of the period, but for the extension; and in the latter case, his right to get them returned is taken away, by virtue of the extension. If the power of extension is a quasi-judicial power, the authority exercising it has to give a reasonable opportunity for being h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
