2015 (9) TMI 146 - HC - Customs

Confiscation of Goods Service of notice Lapse of period Petitioner seeking quashing of communication/letter, Annexure- F, issued by third respondent, contending that non issuance of notice under Section 124 of Customs Act, 1962 within period prescribed under Section 110(2) has given right to petitioner to seek for return of seized goods Held that - Section 110(2) indicate giving of notice within six months from date of seizure of goods is condition precedent to retain seized goods by department and in absence of such notice being issued to owner, goods seized to be returned Annexure-F issued by third respondent would clearly indicate that Show Cause Notice-Annexure-A came to be issued within period of six months from date of seizure of goods as contemplated under Section 110(2) Goods came to be confiscated by proper officer, show cause notice came to be issued before expiry of six months period Section 153 provides that notice issued under Act should be served in manner as provided under said Section It does not even remotely suggest that such person should be served with such notice to hold service of notice as complete Dispatching of notice by registered post would constitute valid service Thus, date of sending or dispatching notice by registered post is date of giving notice as contemplated under Section 110(2) Once authority concerned makes out case for confiscation within time-limit, it cannot sit idle It has to make concerned person aware of such case by giving written notice Therefore, date of service of notice cannot be held as one which entitles petitioner to seek for return of goods on ground that six months period had expired Decided against assesse.

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the show cause notice dated 13.03.2014 under Section 110(2) of the Customs Act, 1962.
2. Legality of the communication dated 05.06.2014, Annexure-F, issued by the third respondent.
3. Compliance with the prescribed period under Section 110(2) of the Customs Act for issuing the show cause notice.
4. Interpretation of the term "given" in Section 110(2) of the Customs Act.
5. Applicability of Section 153 of the Customs Act regarding the service of the show cause notice.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity of the show cause notice dated 13.03.2014:
The petitioner contended that the show cause notice issued on 13.03.2014 was not served within the six-month period prescribed under Section 110(2) of the Customs Act, 1962, as it was received on 17.03.2014. The court examined whether the notice was "given" within the stipulated time frame. The court concluded that the notice was dispatched on 13.03.2014, within the six-month period from the date of seizure (16.09.2013), satisfying the requirement under Section 110(2). Thus, the show cause notice was held to be valid.

2. Legality of the communication dated 05.06.2014, Annexure-F:
The petitioner challenged the communication dated 05.06.2014, which confirmed the issuance of the show cause notice within the prescribed period. The court upheld this communication, reiterating that the dispatch date of the notice (13.03.2014) was within the six-month period, making the notice legally valid.

3. Compliance with the prescribed period under Section 110(2) of the Customs Act:
Section 110(2) mandates that a notice under Section 124(a) must be issued within six months from the date of seizure. The court emphasized that the dispatch date of the notice is crucial for compliance. Since the notice was dispatched on 13.03.2014, it complied with the six-month period, and the petitioner's contention of non-compliance was rejected.

4. Interpretation of the term "given" in Section 110(2) of the Customs Act:
The court analyzed the term "given" in Section 110(2) and concluded that it should be interpreted in conjunction with Section 153 of the Customs Act. The term "given" was construed to mean the date of dispatch of the notice, aligning with the interpretation that dispatching the notice by registered post constitutes valid service. This interpretation was supported by precedents and legislative intent to ensure timely initiation of proceedings.

5. Applicability of Section 153 of the Customs Act regarding the service of the show cause notice:
Section 153 outlines the modes of serving notices, including personal delivery and registered post. The court held that Section 153 controls Section 110(2), meaning that the dispatch date of the notice by registered post is considered the date of giving the notice. This harmonized interpretation ensures that the procedural requirements for serving notices under the Act are met.

Conclusion:
The court dismissed the writ petition, affirming the validity of the show cause notice and the communication dated 05.06.2014. It held that the notice was issued within the prescribed period under Section 110(2) of the Customs Act, and the dispatch date constituted valid service as per Section 153. The petitioner's arguments were rejected, and no order as to costs was made.

← Previous Next →