TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Detention of Goods Without Show Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice; Appeal Allowed After Delay Under Rule 29</h1> <h3>INDERPAL SINGH Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS</h3> INDERPAL SINGH Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS - TMI ISSUES: Whether the detention and confiscation order of goods without issuance of a valid show cause notice (SCN) and without affording personal hearing is sustainable under the Customs Act, 1962'Whether an oral show cause notice can be validly waived by a printed waiver signed by the detained person'Whether the gold chain carried by the passenger qualifies as a personal effect under the Baggage Rules, 2016, and is thus exempt from confiscation'Whether the petitioner is entitled to file an appeal against the Order-in-Original despite the lapse of the statutory period for appeal due to non-grant of personal hearing'Whether the gold chain can be released on payment of fine and customs duty, and under what conditions? RULINGS / HOLDINGS: The detention and confiscation order without issuance of a valid SCN and without affording the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing is 'not sustainable in law' and is set aside.An oral show cause notice cannot be deemed validly served by a 'printed waiver' signed by the person concerned, as such waiver 'fundamentally violate[s] rights' and 'natural justice is not merely lip-service.'The gold chain is recognized as a personal effect under the Baggage Rules, 2016, and subject to payment of a fine and customs duty, may be released to the petitioner.The petitioner is permitted to file an appeal against the Order-in-Original within thirty days despite the lapse of the appeal period, due to the absence of personal hearing, with the appeal to be disposed of within three months.Upon payment of Rs. 45,000/- fine and applicable customs duty, the gold chain shall be released, with warehousing charges and other duties waived off, conditioned on the petitioner not disputing the identity and valuation of the goods. RATIONALE: The Court applied Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962, which mandates issuance of a written show cause notice with an opportunity to make representation and be heard before confiscation or penalty is imposed. The statute allows oral notice only if requested by the person concerned, but even then, a proper hearing is required.Precedent from Amit Kumar v. Commissioner of Customs was relied upon to emphasize that 'printed waivers' of oral SCN and personal hearing are invalid and violate principles of natural justice.The Court referred to a coordinate bench decision holding that failure to issue SCN within six months of seizure entitles the owner to release of goods, underscoring the mandatory nature of notice requirements.The Court recognized the gold chain as personal baggage under the Baggage Rules, 2016, consistent with customs regulations exempting personal effects from confiscation subject to compliance with procedural requirements.In view of the fundamental breach of procedural safeguards, the Court allowed extension of time to file appeal, reflecting a doctrinal emphasis on substantive fairness over strict procedural timelines.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
