2026 (2) TMI 553

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....5 passed by the Hon'ble Justice OM Narayan Rai in W.P.O. No. 496 of 2025, whereby the writ petition challenging the seizure of gold pieces (approx. 154.800 grams) and cash (Rs. 19,77,500) under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962, was dismissed. 2. The facts in a nutshell are that the appellant is the Chief Staff at HALLMARK Assay Centre (operating as M/s. Chennai Touch), located at Village Sripatipur, P.O. Sheakhala, P.S. Chanditala, Hooghly, with a valid trade license from Sripatipur Ilipur Gram Panchayat. The establishment tests gold purity and trades in old gold ornaments. On 18th January 2024, at around 10:00 a.m., Customs officials entered the appellant's premises at HALLMARK Assay Center in Sripatipur, Sheakhala, Hooghly,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nce is placed on the proviso to Section 110(2), which mandates that reasons in writing be recorded solely by the Commissioner and communicated to the owner before expiry and that the subordinate officers lack such authority, as affirmed in I.J. Rao v. Bibhuti Bhushan Bagh (1989) and Harbans Lal v. Collector (1993). It is further submitted that the Single Judge erred in accepting these documents without forensic verification from the Central Forensic Science Laboratory, Kolkata, while disregarding the affidavit-in-opposition, the anomalous sequence of SCN dispatch (post-dating six months) and the respondents' failure to produce e-office records. Notably, no summons under Section 108 was issued or responded to, undermining any justificati....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....re dispute hinges on Section 110(2)'s procedural compliance for extension and seizure validity issues essentially factual, involving document authenticity, timelines and investigation sufficiency. While the appellant raises serious allegations of tampering and authority excess, these cannot be conclusively resolved in writ jurisdiction without a full fact-finding inquiry. The Single Judge appropriately noted no "apparent reason to doubt" genuineness post-affidavit review but refrained from final merits, as SCN proceedings remain pending. 6. The Adjudicating Authority under the Customs Act serves as the designated fact-finding body and any interference by this Court at the interlocutory stage prior to completion of adjudication would ....