1993 (1) TMI 91

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....long with the Officers of the Central Excise, Madras, on 28-12-1985, searched among others the premises belonging Door No. 9,14th Avenue, Harrington Road, Madras-31 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said premises'). As a result of the search of the said premises and others, the officers were able to recover cut and polished diamonds, foreign currency, primary gold pieces, certain incriminating documents and also Indian currency amounting to Rs. 6,50,950/-. Out of the above said recoveries, we are now concerned with only a sum of Rs. 16,100/-. Admittedly, the said premises belongs to the third respondent, son-in-law of the petitioner. It is not in dispute that the said sum of Rs. 16,100/- was recovered from a room which was under lock and key....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d amount of Rs. 16,100/- belonged to the petitioner. In the absence of any material to make the respondents - Department believe that the said sum of Rs 16,100/- does not belong to the petitioner, the petitioner is entitled to the return of the same. 4. Mr. K. Jayachandran, learned Additional Central Government Standing Counsel, in reply to the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the amount of Rs. 16,100/- is part and parcel of the Indian currency and other things recovered at Premises No. 9, 14th Avenue, Harrington Road, Madras-31, in respect of which adjudication proceedings are pending. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner can appear before the Adjudicating Authority and establish her claim....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....here. The petitioner, on return to the house, and on coming to know of the seizure of the amount, sent a representation on 21-2-1986, claiming the amount as hers and demanding the return of the same. Though this was duly served on the concerned officer, the show cause notice dated 13-6-1986 issued long after this claim by the petitioner and sent to the third and fourth respondents, did not call upon the petitioner to show cause why the said sum of Rs. 16,100/- should not be confiscated. Instead, a copy of the show cause notice was marked to the petitioner along with 19 others. I am not able to agree with the learned Additional Central Government Standing Counsel that the marking of a copy will amount to the issue of a show cause notice and ....