UMA SHANKAR VERMA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUS PREVENTIVE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With the agreement of the parties, the writ application is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner had purchased gold from M/s. Standard Chartered Bank and that it had been sent from Delhi to Calcutta, but in Calcutta it was illegally seized by the respondents.

(3.) The respondents' case is that the gold was seized by them since they suspected that it was imported into India unauthorisedly and that the petitioner had not paid the Customs duty on the gold. The respondents' further case is that the petitioner's contention that the gold which was seized was the same as was bought by them from Standard Chartered Bank is not correct, based on the identification of the gold as seized, when compared with the identification of the gold as sold by the Standard Chartered Bank.