Customs due process requirements remain mandatory before duty demand, guarantor action, or seizure of goods.

An earlier assurance to act according to due process remained binding, so the respondents could not bypass the requirement of a show cause notice before demanding duty or proceeding against the guarantor. Approaching the guarantor did not dispense with compliance with the rule of law or the prescribed customs procedure. Any seizure of goods and any release had to be carried out strictly under the Customs Act, 1962 and the applicable rules. The respondents were therefore directed to issue a show cause notice and proceed only in accordance with the prescribed customs law and procedure.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondents were bound to issue a show cause notice and follow the prescribed customs procedure before demanding duty, securing the demand through the guarantor, or seizing the goods.

Analysis: The order records that the earlier assurance to act according to due process remained binding. It finds that approaching the guarantor did not dispense with the obligation to issue a show cause notice or otherwise comply with the rule of law. The Court further states that any seizure of goods, and any consequent release, must be carried out strictly in accordance with the Customs Act, 1962 and the applicable rules.

Conclusion: The respondents were directed to issue a show cause notice and to proceed only in accordance with the prescribed customs law and procedure.

---