9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (2) TMI 1274 - HC - CustomsSeeking return of seized currency - two mobile phones - computer and documents - expiry of the statutory period of six months provided in section 110(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT - Learned advocate, Mr.S.S.Iyer, who has taken us through the various correspondences and has urged that under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 the six month's period after the Seizure Panchnama on 3.4.2019 is also over on 3.4.2020 and there is not a whisper of the seized currency notes in the show cause notice dated 27.11.2020. His correspondence also has not been responded so far as this pertinent issue is concerned. According to him, it is a covered matter as in the case of DEEPAK NATVARLAL SONI VERSUS UNION OF INDIA 2018 (9) TMI 1912 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT . Issue Notice for final disposal, returnable on 8.3.2021.
Issues:
Petition seeking return of seized cash under Customs Act, 1962. Analysis: The petitioner filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the return of seized cash amounting to &8377; 64,86,100, belonging to the petitioner and his family members. The petitioner requested the court to hold the impugned panchnama proceedings and non-return of the seized currency as illegal, void, and in violation of statutory provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. The petitioner also sought the return of the seized currency, mobile phones, computer, and documents, as well as the quashing of the seizure and continued retention of the items beyond the statutory period. The court noted the arguments presented by the petitioner's advocate, emphasizing the expiration of the six-month period after the seizure and the absence of any mention of the seized currency in the show cause notice. The advocate referred to a relevant case law to support the petitioner's claims. The court decided to issue notice for final disposal of the case, scheduled for 8.3.2021, permitting service through e-Mode in addition to the regular mode of service. The court's decision indicates a willingness to proceed with the case and address the issues raised by the petitioner regarding the seizure and non-return of the cash and other items under the Customs Act, 1962. The court's action demonstrates a consideration of the petitioner's claims and a commitment to adjudicate the matter in accordance with the law and relevant legal principles.
|
