Case Law Details
SYM Company Vs Principal Commissioner (Delhi High Court)
Introduction: In a recent legal development, SYM Company has approached the Delhi High Court seeking the unconditional release of goods seized under Bills of Entries. The court’s intervention in this matter is based on the contention that, as per Section 110(2) of the Customs Act, no notice regarding the seizure of goods was issued within six months. This article explores the details of the case, the legal provisions invoked, and the court’s directive to the Customs Department for the release of the seized goods.
Detailed Analysis: SYM Company, the petitioner, invoked Section 110(2) of the Customs Act, 1962, contending that no notice was issued within six months of the seizure of goods under Section 110(1) of the Act. Section 110(2) stipulates that if no notice is given within the specified period, the seized goods must be returned to the person from whose possession they were seized.
The court, taking cognizance of this provision, considered the petitioner’s plea and directed the Customs Department to unconditionally release the seized goods imported under Bills of Entries. The court’s decision was grounded in the clear language of Section 110(2), which provides for the automatic return of goods if no notice is served within the stipulated timeframe.
The respondents, representing the Customs Department, acknowledged the petitioner’s reliance on Section 110(2) and expressed their willingness to release the goods without prejudicing their right to adjudicate the proceedings based on the show cause notice issued to the petitioner. The court accepted this assurance, and the respondents committed to releasing the goods within one week from the date of the court’s directive.
Conclusion: The Delhi High Court’s directive in the SYM Company case underscores the importance of adhering to the procedural requirements outlined in the Customs Act. By emphasizing Section 110(2), the court has ensured that the petitioner’s right to the return of seized goods is upheld. The ruling provides clarity on the statutory timelines for issuing notices under the Customs Act and affirms the principle that procedural safeguards must be followed. As the Customs Department agrees to release the goods within the specified period, this case serves as a reminder of the significance of timely legal proceedings and adherence to statutory provisions in matters related to customs seizures.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF DELHI HIGH COURT
1. Petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to unconditionally release the seized goods imported under Bills of Entries No. 2143897 dated 05.10.2022 and 2994766 dated 21.10.2022 under seizure memorandum bearing DIN-2022 1274NE0000007961.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on Section 110 (2) of the Customs Act, 1962 to contend that no notice in respect of seizure of goods under Section 110 (1) of the said Act was given within six months of the seizure of goods and as such the goods are liable to be returned to the petitioner as the goods were seized from the petitioner.
3. Section 110(2) of the said Act reads as under:-
“(2) Where any goods are seized under sub- section (1) and no notice in respect thereof is given under clause (a) of section 124 within six months of the seizure of the goods, the goods shall be returned to the person from whose possession they were seized:
Provided that the aforesaid period of six months may, on sufficient cause being shown, be extended by Commissioner of Customs
4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the respondents are willing to release the goods under the subject Bills of Entries, however, without prejudice to their rights to adjudicate the proceedings on the show cause notice issued to the petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents assures that goods shall be released within a period of one week from today.
6. The statement is taken on record.
7. In view thereof, the petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release the goods seized under the Bills of Entries No. 2143897 dated 05.10.2022 and 2994766 dated 21.10.2022 under seizure memorandum bearing DIN-20221274NE0000007961, within a period of one week from today.
Author Bio
