Gold bangle seizure invalid due to delayed show cause notice under Customs Act Sections 110(2) and 124

The HC directed release of petitioner's seized gold bangle under Customs Act Sections 110(2) and 124. The seizure occurred on 04.04.2023, requiring show cause notice by 03.10.2023. However, respondents issued notice on 05.10.2023, exceeding the mandatory six-month period without utilizing extension provisions. The court held that timely show cause notice is fundamental for confiscation proceedings, and failure to comply renders the action invalid under Section 110(2). The petition was allowed with immediate release directed.

---

---

Issues:
The petitioner seeks the release of a gold bangle seized under the Customs Act while traveling from Imphal to Delhi, invoking Sections 110(2) and 124 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Judgment Details:

1. The petitioner requests the release of the gold bangle under Sections 110(2) and 124 of the Customs Act, 1962, citing a delay in receiving the show cause notice beyond the stipulated six-month period from the date of seizure.

2. The petitioner's counsel argues that the delayed receipt of the show cause notice violates Section 110(2) and 124 of the Customs Act, relying on a Delhi High Court judgment and a subsequent Supreme Court order affirming the time-bound nature of such notices.

3. The respondent explains the delay in issuing the show cause notice was due to civil unrest in Imphal, preventing timely dispatch, and cites legal precedents to support the argument that the validity of the notice is not contingent upon the time limit for returning seized goods.

4. The Court reviews the relevant sections of the Customs Act, emphasizing the mandatory nature of issuing notices within the prescribed time frame under Sections 110(2) and 124 to prevent confiscation or penalties.

5. The Court observes that the show cause notice was dispatched from Shillong, not Imphal, undermining the respondent's justification for the delay, and criticizes the respondent's handling of the case as misleading and careless.

6. Referring to the cited judgment, the Court affirms the importance of adhering to the six-month period for issuing show cause notices, finding the delay in this case inexcusable despite the cited legal precedents.

7. Consequently, the Court allows the writ petition, directing the immediate release of the gold bangle to the petitioner, and concludes the case without imposing any costs on either party.

---