9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 1278X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 05.2021 and, it seems that he had sought further time up to 31.05.2021 to respond to the show cause - Though time was given upto 31.05.2021, that was also accepted on behalf of the petitioners to respond to the show cause notice, they could not make it. The reason for not responding to the show cause notice, on or before 31.05.2021, is obvious that, during the said period, there has been a complete lock down throughout the State, and in this regard, the lock down already imposed had been extended from 24.05.2021 to 31.05.2021. In this case, after the 10.05.2021 notice, that is, record of personal hearing, whereby, the time was given up to 31.05.2021, no further time was given or no extension of time was given to the petitioners to respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dentified him in the bus, he admitted that, he was carrying smuggled gold in his trouser pocket. The interception was conducted by the customs, based on the specific intelligence that one A.Sowkath Ali, that is, the petitioner in WP(MD)No.16652 of 2021 was smuggling of gold bars of foreign origin from Srilanka into India and two persons in his gang, namely, one P.Subramaniam and the V.Ayupkhan, the petitioner in this Writ Petition were carrying the smuggling gold, therefore, the officers attached to various regional units of DRI, Chennai Zonal Unit, mounted surveillance on 27.02.2020 and during the surveillance, the said P.Subramaniam and V.Ayupkhan boarded the bus at Ramanathaputan proceeded towards Madurai and Karaikudi, respectively. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sult, since there has been a complete lock down, the petitioners could not contact either their Counsel or their auditor or any other assistance, and therefore, on or before 31.05.2021, ie., the date or time, which was given by the respondents to the petitioners to respond to the show cause notice, it could not be complied with. 8 .Therefore, the petitioners had been in the bonafide impression that, some further extension of time or date would be given by the respondents to the petitioners to respond to the show cause notice, however, straight away, the impugned order of confiscation as well as imposition of penalty, was issued on 03.08.2021. 9 .Therefore, on the ground of not giving proper opportunity to respond to the show cause n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondents, on instructions, would submit that, a detailed show cause notice was given on 25.03.2021, therefore, there had been enough time for the petitioners to respond, but they have not chosen to respond, however, at one point of time, when on 30.04.2021, personal hearing notice was given, fixing a personal hearing date on 10.05.2021, that too, through video conference, on the said date, that is on 10.05.2021, the petitioners' Counsel did appear through video conference and he sought for time upto 31.05.2021, that was also considered and granted, therefore, any date between 10.05.2021 and 31.05.2021, the petitioners could have responded to the show cause notice, that too, by video conference as the petitioners were not expected to come ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... response to the same, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners did appear through video conference on 10.05.2021 and, it seems that he had sought further time up to 31.05.2021 to respond to the show cause. 15 .Though time was given upto 31.05.2021, that was also accepted on behalf of the petitioners to respond to the show cause notice, they could not make it. The reason for not responding to the show cause notice, on or before 31.05.2021, is obvious that, during the said period, there has been a complete lock down throughout the State, and in this regard, the lock down already imposed had been extended from 24.05.2021 to 31.05.2021. During the complete lock down period, it cannot be expected that the petitioner can mobilize the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this case, after the 10.05.2021 notice, that is, record of personal hearing, whereby, the time was given up to 31.05.2021, no further time was given or no extension of time was given to the petitioners to respond and thereafter, the impugned order of confiscation of goods had been passed on 03.08.2021. Therefore, this Court feel that such order can be said to be vitiated, in view of the lock down period, where, the expected time since was not given by the respondents, beyond 31.05.2021. Therefore, this Court feel that the impugned order can be interfered with only for the limited purpose of remitting the matter to the respondents to give one more chance to the petitioners to respond to the show cause notice and for personal hearing and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
