Customs' Decision cannot Sit Over Customs Appellate Order to Release Goods: Delhi HC [Read Order]

In a recent case, the Delhi High Court has held that the Customs Department cannot overrule an appellate body's order compelling it to release an assessee's goods on the sole pretext that it wishes to request a modification to the order.

Karnataka HC Rejects Actress Ranya Rao’s Bail Plea in Rs. 12.5 Crore Gold Smuggling Case [Read Order]

The Petitioner, Haris Aslam, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking issuance of an appropriate writ directing the Respondent- Commissioner of Customs to release the personal jewellery of the Petitioner i.e. gold ring weighing 20 grams and a gold chain weighing 137 grams (‘gold items’) seized vide detention receipt.

The Petitioner is an Indian citizen and resident of UAE having valid residence ID. He is a software engineer working in Emirates Airlines for at least 7 years at the time of filing of the present writ petition. It was submitted that being an employee of Emirates.

How to Audit Public Charitable Trusts under the Income Tax Act Click Here

Airlines, he frequently travels to India to visit his family. On 23rd March, 2024, while travelling, he was wearing gold items which were detained by the Customs Department on the ground that the Petitioner had failed to declare the same.

The Petitioner had signed the waiver and hence, no Show Cause Notice (‘SCN’) was issued and no personal hearing was granted. The Order-in-Original has been passed on 14th June, 2024 ( ‘OIO’) by which the absolute confiscation was directed . This OIO was challenged by the Petitioner in appeal before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). The Commissioner allowed the said appeal.

Bill Printing and Dispatch Held Not Taxable as Business Auxiliary Service: CESTAT Sets Aside Demand[Read Order]

After paying the redemption fine and penalty, the petitioner argued that the jewelry was his personal belongings and that the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) had granted his appeal against its seizure. The goods were not, however, not released. The Respondent-Department argued that the commodities were not released because it had chosen to challenge the Commissioner's order before the Revisional Authority.

Want a deeper insight into the Income Tax Bill, 2025? Click here

The Court has held in several matters that the signing of a waiver of SCN and waiver of personal hearing by a way of preprinted waiver form would be contrary to principles of natural justice. The High Court noted that neither a show cause notice nor a hearing notice was issued to the Petitioner. The respondent also failed to produce any voluntary signed waiver declaration.

A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta viewed that once the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) has also allowed redemption, the decision to file revision cannot be a ground to withhold the release of the goods. Further, no stay has been granted by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals).

Read More: EPFO updates Form 13 to Separate Taxable and Non-Taxable PF Components for Accurate Tax Deductions on Interest Earnings

The clarification was provided in a petition submitted by a UAE resident whose gold chain and ring were seized by the Department upon their arrival in India. Furthermore, the High Court ordered the Department to release the Petitioner's jewelry in view of the Commissioner's order, which hasn't been stayed yet.

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscanpremium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates