KANUNGO AND CO Vs. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner company carries on business as importer and dealer of watches. For importation of wrist watches in contravention of import control restrictions, the shop room of the petitioner, at No. 129, Radha Bazar Street, Calcutta, was searched by the Customs authorities, on October 17, 1959, and 390 pieces of wrist watches were seized. The petitioner company tried to explain the possession of the wrist watches on a twofold basis, namely, purchase of the wrist watches locally and receipt of some wrist watches from its customers for repair. In this Rule, I need not concern myself with the earlier phase of the dispute between the petitioner and the Customs authorities, when some of the seized watches were released, order of confiscation was passed in respect of the rest and then again the order was quashed on appeal for non-compliance with the principles of natural justice. Ultimately, on August 21, 1961, there was a notice served upon the petitioner in respect of 280 pieces of wrist watches, requiring the petitioner to show cause why the said watches should not be confiscated as unlawfully imported watches. The material portion of the notice is set out below:

(2.) In the earlier part of the notice, there was a long recitation as to why the Customs authorities disbelieved the story of local purchases and custody for repair of some of the watches as alleged by the petitioner.

(3.) The petitioner challenged the notice, before this Court, inter alia, on certain preliminary grounds, namely;