Court orders return of seized money due to Customs Department's failure to issue timely notice.

The Court allowed the writ petition, directing the return of the seized Rs. 16,100 to the petitioner. The Department's failure to issue a show cause notice within the prescribed time limit under Section 110(2) of the Customs Act rendered their retention of the money unjustified. The Court found the petitioner entitled to the return of the seized amount as the statutory time limit for issuing a show cause notice had lapsed. No costs were awarded in the matter.

---

---

Issues:
Claim for the return of seized money without a show cause notice under Section 110(2) of the Customs Act.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus to direct the return of Rs. 16,100 seized during a search at a specific premises. The money was claimed to belong to the petitioner, who sent a representation claiming ownership and demanding its return. The Department failed to issue a show cause notice within the prescribed time limit under Section 110(2) of the Customs Act. The petitioner argued that in the absence of a show cause notice, the Department had no authority to retain the money. The petitioner consistently maintained ownership of the seized amount, and there was no material to doubt the claim. The Department contended that the money was part of items seized pending adjudication proceedings and that the petitioner could establish her claim before the Adjudicating Authority. The Department believed the seized money was proceeds of smuggled goods. The Court considered the facts, noting that the room where the money was seized belonged to the petitioner and was under lock and key. The petitioner promptly claimed ownership upon learning of the seizure. The Court found that the Department's action of not issuing a show cause notice to the petitioner, despite her claim, was unjustified. The Court held that the petitioner was entitled to the return of the seized amount as the statutory time limit for issuing a show cause notice had lapsed.

In conclusion, the Court allowed the writ petition, directing the return of the seized Rs. 16,100 to the petitioner. No costs were awarded in the matter.

---