9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 385X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith the alleged waiver which is relied upon would show that the oral SCN cannot be deemed to have been served in this manner as is being alleged by the Department. If an oral SCN waiver has to be agreed to by the person concerned, the same ought to be in the form of a proper declaration, consciously signed by the person concerned. Even then, an opportunity of hearing ought to be afforded, inasmuch as, the person concerned cannot be condemned unheard in these matters. Printed waivers of this nature would fundamentally violate rights of persons who are affected. Natural justice is not merely lip-service. It has to be given effect and complied with in letter and spirit. This Court is of the opinion that the printed waiver of SCN and the print ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said goods. 4. When the matter was listed on 11th December 2024, the Customs Department informed the Court that the Order-in-Original has now been passed in the case. The said Order-in-Original dated 29th November 2024 was then handed over to the ld. Counsel for the Petitioner and then brought on record. 5. The brief background of this case is that the Petitioner arrived from Dubai in Terminal-3, IGI Airport, New Delhi on 3rd March, 2024. He was traveling with his wife and was crossing through Green Channel, when he was intercepted and the following goods were detained by the Customs Official:- (i) One gold chain (ii) One three layered gold chain with black beads and gold pendant (iii) Four cut pieces of gold bar (iv) Sony PS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... written SCN or even a personal hearing. 11. It is further submitted that insofar as gold is concerned, the discretion vests with the authorities whether to release or not release the gold articles, insofar as the other articles are concerned, the same have been permitted to be redeemed by paying a sum of Rs. 85,000/-. 12. The Court has considered the matter. The main plank of the Respondent's submission is on the basis of the Standard Printed Form which is titled Green Channel Violation (Request for Release of Detained Goods) which has been extracted hereinabove. 13. A perusal of the above would show that in Printed Form, the following has been included:- "It is humbly requested that said detained goods may please be RELEASED. I regret ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he grounds on which it is proposed to confiscate the goods or to impose a penalty; (b) is given an opportunity of making a representation in writing within such reasonable time as may be specified in the notice against the grounds of confiscation or imposition of penalty mentioned therein; and (c) is given a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter: Provided that the notice referred to in clause (a) and the representation referred to in clause (b) may, at the request of the person concerned be oral. [Provided further that notwithstanding issue of notice under this section, the proper officer may issue a supplementary notice under such circumstances and in such manner as may be prescribed.]" 16. A perusal of Section 124 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting with this petition, it is pertinent to note that the matters in issue in the present matter are squarely covered by decision in the case of Chaganlal Gainmull v. Collector of Central Excise, where it was held that if the show cause notice was not issued within six months from the date of seizure, the consequence would be that the person from whom the gold was seized would become entitled to its return. Although the aspect of extension of period of detention for another six months vide the Proviso to Section 110 (2) of the Act was introduced w.e.f 29.03.20184 the ratio still holds sway to the effect that issuing of notice to the owner for detention of seized goods is mandatory and the Apex Court frowned upon the fact that no explanation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e already being considered by this Court in the Qamar Jahan Vs. Union of India, 2025:DHC:174-DB where the Court opined that the Baggage Rules of 2016 are required to be re-looked by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, considering the price of gold which has increased over the years. The said matter is listed on 27th March, 2025. A copy of this order be placed in the said case as well. 23. Copy of this order be sent to CBIC. Registry is directed to communicate this order to the OSD (Legal), CBIC through email ([email protected]) for necessary information and compliance. Let Mr. Gibran Naushad, ld. Counsel, also communicate this order to the OSD (Legal), CBIC for necessary information and compliance. 24. The petition is allowed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
