COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTIVE) Vs. BABITA DEVI MAURYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal has been preferred by the revenue against an order dated 4-12-2014 by which the learned Trial Court directed provisional release of the goods seized by the Customs authorities. It is not in dispute that the goods of the petitioner were seized on 13-7-2014. No show cause notice contemplated by sub-section (2) of Section 110 of the Customs Act within a period of six months was issued. Therefore, the writ petitioner became entitled to return of the goods. Mr. Dey, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that extension of time for issuing a show cause notice has been granted by another six months. He was, however, unable to produce any copy of any such letter by which such extension was allegedly granted.

(2.) Since, the matter is pending, we do not want to make any observation, but we can hardly resist expressing our dissatisfaction as regards the way the revenue has proceeded. By our orders passed on 13-1-2015, 12-3-2015 and 17-3-2015 we directed the writ petitioner to produce papers to show that the goods seized are indigenous as claimed by them and such papers have been produced. Papers required by the revenue have also been produced. In spite thereof, the revenue is unable to show that they had any reason to believe that the goods in question were liable to confiscation. Learned Advocate has not pointed out any infirmity in the order under challenge which may impel us to interfere. On the contrary, the conduct of the appellant has left much to be desired.

(3.) The appeal is thus dismissed with costs assessed at Rs. 50,000/-. The time granted by the Trial Court for the purpose of furnishing securities including bond etc. and release of the goods shall commence from today.