9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Interpretation of the term 'given' in various sections of the Customs Act.
Issue 1: Meaning of 'given' in Section 110(2) of the Customs Act. - Justice Tarun Chatterjee held that 'given' in Section 110(2) means the notice must be received by the importer within the prescribed time. - A previous unreported decision by Justice Ruma Pal equated issuance of notice with giving of notice under Section 110(2). - Division Bench in Union of India v. Shri Kanti Tarafder concluded that notice under Section 110(2) should be given as per Section 153, either by personal delivery or sending by registered post. Issue 2: Interpretation of 'given' in Section 124 of the Customs Act. - In India Sales International v. Collector of Customs, it was held that notice under Section 124(a) must be issued within six months of seizure, with the time starting from the date of dispatch of the notice by post. - Section 153 provides the manner of service of notice, allowing for tendering or sending by registered post. Issue 3: Legislative intent regarding service of notice under the Customs Act. - The Division Bench affirmed in Tirupati Trading Corporation v. Collector of Customs that notice can be served by tendering to the owner or sending by registered post. - Previous judgments like Bowreah Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs supported this view, overruling conflicting decisions like Oyatape Fibres Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs. In conclusion, the Division Bench judgments have clarified that notice under the Customs Act should be served as per Section 153, allowing for either personal delivery or sending by registered post. The responsibility lies with the Customs authorities to ensure proper service of notices within the prescribed time limits.
|
