TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 430
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....requesting that the matter be decided on merits. 2. Through the present Petition, the Petitioner seeks a direction for unconditional release of the aforesaid gold bars and further prays that no detention or warehousing charges be recovered from him at the time of release. FACTUAL MATRIX 3. In order to appreciate the controversy involved in the present Petition, the relevant facts, in brief, are required to be noticed. 4. The Petitioner, an Indian citizen, arrived at the Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi, from Medina by Flight No. SV 758 on 10.04.2023. Two gold bars, totally weighing 233 grams and stated to be of 995 purity, were found in his possession. The goods were detained vide Detention Receipt No. 001633 dated 10.04.2023. 5. The Detention Receipt describes the goods as "One Transparent Plastic bottle containing 02 gold bars total weighing 233 grams purity 995, wrapped with customs tape & plier having no impression". The Detention Receipt further records that the goods "have been detained at my request and sealed in my presence over my signature". The receipt bears the signature of the Petitioner as well as the signatures of the concerned Customs of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e was no compliance whatsoever with the requirements relating to Show Cause Notice, particularly when the Petitioner's own written request acknowledges receipt of an oral Show Cause Notice. CONTENTIONS OF THE PARTIES 12. Contentions of the Petitioner 12.1. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that Section 110(2) of the Act mandates issuance of a Show Cause Notice within six months from the date of seizure, subject to a further extension of six months in accordance with the proviso thereto. It was submitted that even the maximum period of one year has expired and, consequently, the continued detention of the gold bars is impermissible. 12.2. It was submitted that an oral Show Cause Notice cannot be presumed merely because the Petitioner is stated to have waived a written Show Cause Notice. According to learned counsel, Section 124 of the Act requires the person concerned to be informed of the grounds on which confiscation of the goods or imposition of penalty is proposed. 12.3. It was further submitted that the statement under Section 108 of the Act cannot be treated as a Show Cause Notice. Learned counsel also disputes the voluntariness and correctness of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....2025, has held that the period prescribed under Section 110(2) for issuance of the notice contemplated by Section 124(a) is mandatory and that, in the absence of such notice within the prescribed period, the statutory consequence contemplated under Section 110(2) follows. The Supreme Court has also clarified that the time period under Section 110(2) and the substantive requirements of Section 124 operate in distinct fields. 16. Equally, this Court has held that a mere pre-printed form recording that a passenger does not require a Show Cause Notice or personal hearing cannot, by itself, be treated as sufficient compliance with Section 124 of the Act. In Ms. Shubhangi Gupta (supra), this Court rejected the Revenue's contention that the statutory requirement stood satisfied merely because an oral Show Cause Notice was asserted and the passenger was stated to have waived the requirement. The Court noted, inter alia, that there is no provision for waiver of the notice prescribed under Section 124. 17. The aforesaid principles, however, cannot be applied in isolation from the peculiar factual matrix of the present case. The question before us is not whether a passenger can, by mer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....allege that his earlier statement had been forcibly obtained or that the contents thereof were incorrect. On the contrary, the subsequent request proceeds on the basis that the Petitioner had committed a mistake by opting for the Green Channel and not declaring the dutiable goods. 25. The subsequent assertion that the Petitioner had in fact declared the gold at the Red Channel, therefore, raises a disputed question of fact which cannot be satisfactorily adjudicated in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. 26. This Court is also not persuaded to undertake an examination of the alleged CCTV footage in the present proceedings. The Petitioner seeks, in substance, a finding that the contemporaneous documents relied upon by the Customs Department are false or were obtained by coercion and that the Petitioner had, in fact, declared the gold. Such an exercise would necessarily require appreciation of evidence and determination of disputed questions of fact. The writ jurisdiction is not ordinarily the appropriate forum for undertaking such an evidentiary enquiry. 27. The Petitioner's reliance upon Jatin Ahuja (supra) does not advance his case to the e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t for release also proceeds on the basis of the detention. The statutory consequences relied upon by the Petitioner are therefore sought to be founded upon a factual characterisation of the proceedings which itself is disputed on the record. 32. In these circumstances, this Court is of the view that the Petitioner has failed to establish an undisputed case of statutory violation warranting issuance of a mandamus for release of the goods. The Court cannot, in the exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction, accept one disputed version of the facts while rejecting the contemporaneous documents relied upon by the Respondent, particularly when some of those documents bear the Petitioner's own signatures. 33. This Court may also note that the Petitioner's challenge is not confined to the alleged non-issuance of a Show Cause Notice. He seeks a finding that the Customs officials falsely implicated him, that his declaration at the Red Channel was ignored, that the statement was obtained under coercion, and that the documents relied upon by the Department are fabricated or otherwise unreliable. These are matters requiring appreciation of evidence and cannot be conclusively determin....