9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (11) TMI 84X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f six months have elapsed from the date of seizure of the contraband, when the show cause notice was served on the petitioner. The following dates are not in dispute : The seizure was on 23-4-2003; the show cause notice is dated 16-10-2003 and the petitioner's case is that, it was served on him on 30-10-2003. Sub-section (1) of Section 110 of the Customs Act enables the proper officer, if he has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the arguments advanced. The date of seizure was on 23-4-2003. The show cause notice is issued under Section 124 of the Customs Act. The notice is dated 16-10-2003. Assuming that the show cause notice was served on the petitioner only on 30-10-2003, can it be said that the show cause notice had been issued beyond the period of six months from the date of seizure. A careful reading of sub-section (2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e person concerned alone should be the date to be taken into account, then any person, on whom the notice is attempted to be served, would evade receipt by avoiding and keeping the notice away from being served on him for a period beyond six months and then he would put that as a ground in the forefront to claim return of the goods. For such a construction namely, the date of service of notice on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the alternative. In other words, the serving authority can adopt any one of the modes prescribed therein. Therefore finding that the notice in this case is shown to have been sent on 16-10-2003, I hold that there is strict compliance of the requirement of sub-section (a) of Section 110 of the Customs Act. Consequently the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. W.P.M.P. No. 385 05 of 2003 is c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
