AJAY KUMAR SAHA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners, who are traders in betelnuts, seek appropriate writ for release of 40 bags of betelnuts which were seized from Break Van of Brahmputra Mail at Patna Junction on 28.4.1999 by the officers of Customs, Headquarter Patna. One of the grounds for release of the betelnuts is failure on the part of the custom authorities to comply with section 110 (2) of the Customs Act, 1962.

(2.) THE first petitioner asserts that he had purchased 10 bags of Assam Kata Dry Supari weighing 800 kg. from M/s Amal Chandra Saha, Barpeta Road, Assam on 24.4.1999 on which Assam General Sales Tax was paid. Petitioner no. 2 purchased 10 bags of Assam Kata Dry Supari from Paresh Chandra Saha, Barpeta Road, Assam on the same day and 10 bags from Dhirendra Mohan Saha, Barpeta Road, Assam on 25.4.1999. Petitioner no. 3 purchased 10 bags of Assam Kata Supari from Ganesh Chandra Saha on 25.4.1999. Copies of the challan relating to above purchases are annexed as Annexure -1 series. It was further asserted that tax of Market Committee were paid on all the aforesaid purchases. 40 bags of betelnuts of above -description were booked with the railway from Barpeta Road for Varanasi City booking office and the consignment were sent by the railway authorities in the Break Van of Brahmputra Mail.

(3.) THE goods of the petitioners were seized on 28.4.1999. It is contended that as per requirement under section 110 (2) of the Customs Act petitioners ought to have been given notice within six months of seizure of the goods but since notices were not received within six months, the petitioners became entitled for release of the seized goods under section 110 of the Customs Act. Notices were received much after six months in breach of section 110(2) of the Customs Act. The period of six months for giving notice under section 110 (2) of the Customs Act has not been extended by the Collector. It was further contended that it is obvious from the show cause notice that the inquiry has not been completed under Chapter XIII of the Customs Act, 1962 as stated in the show cause notice that Assistant Commissioner, Customs, Guwahati had been requested to verify the genuine -ness of the firms selling goods, sales tax payment etc. The seizure has been challenged on other grounds also. It was contended that it was not legal for the Customs authorities to seize the betelnuts on mere suspicion that betelnuts were of foreign origin.