Customs Seizes 58-Gram Gold Chain: Delhi HC Orders Personal Hearing, Invalidates Personal Hearing Waiver Form Practice
The High Court ruled the Customs Waiver invalid and ordered a fresh hearing with proper notice while considering the petitioner’s request to re-export the seized gold chain.
In the recent ruling, the Delhi High Court directed Customs authorities to conduct a personal hearing for a traveller whose 58-gram gold chain was seized at IGIAirport, Delhi. The court held that the pre-printed personal hearing waiver form used by Customs was invalid, stating that passengers must receive proper notice and a fair hearing. The Present petition was filed by the...
In the recent ruling, the Delhi High Court directed Customs authorities to conduct a personal hearing for a traveller whose 58-gram gold chain was seized at IGIAirport, Delhi. The court held that the pre-printed personal hearing waiver form used by Customs was invalid, stating that passengers must receive proper notice and a fair hearing.
The Present petition was filed by the Petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the release of one gold chain, weighing 58 grams, seized by the Customs Department, with Detention Receipt bearing no. DR/INDEL4/19-02-2024/003822 dated 19th February, 2024.
The Petitioner, Javed Ali Gouse, travelled from Saudi Arabia to Delhi on 19th February, 2024, and upon arrival at the Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi, he was intercepted by the concerned official of the Customs Department and the gold chain was seized.
Complete Supreme Court Judgment on GST from 2017 to 2024 with Free E-Book Access, Click here
The Counsel for the Petitioner, D. S. Chadha, submitted that no Show Cause Notice (SCN) was issued to the Petitioner and till date no personal hearing has also been afforded to the Petitioner. in terms of the decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India & Anr. v. Jatin Ahuja, Civil Appeal No. 3489/2024, release of the gold chain was sought.
On the other hand, the Counsel for the Respondent, Aakarsh Srivastava, SSC, submitted that the Counsel for the Petitioner had waived the personal hearing and received oral SCN. An undertaking has been handed over by the Respondent Counsel. Further, the Counsel submitted that the notice of personal hearing was also served upon the Counsel for the Petitioner, giving three hearings in August, 2025.
The Counsel for the Petitioner, Prabhjyoti Kaur Chadha, who was present in court, submitted that when she had appeared before the Customs Department to get the goods of the Petitioner appraised, the said undertaking was taken from her by the Customs Department. Further, it was submitted that the notice for personal hearing has not been served upon the Petitioner or the Counsels.
“The Customs Department ought to in future follow a system by which in addition to notices by speed post, registered post or courier, notices are also sent on the email address which is provided on the letterhead of the Petitioner or any authorised person. This would avoid substantial delay and matters proceeding ex-parte as has happened in the present case.”
The Bench of Delhi High Court consisted of Justice Pratibha M. Singh and Justice Renu Bhatnagar, heard and reviewed the matter filed by the petitioner.
After considering the submissions made by both the counsels, the High Court held that standard pre-printed waivers of SCN and personal hearing would not be valid in law as held in Amit Kumar v. The Commissioner of Customs, 2025: DHC:751- DB which was observed as:
“If an oral SCN waiver has to be agreed to by the person concerned, the same ought to be in the form of a proper declaration, consciously signed by the person concerned. Even then, an opportunity of hearing ought to be afforded, inasmuch as, the person concerned cannot be condemned unheard in these matters. Printed waivers of this nature would fundamentally violate rights of persons who are affected.”
Further, the court has an inclination to grant a personal hearing to the Petitioner on 14th January, 2026. A personal hearing notice shall be issued to the Petitioner’s email address and mobile number. The hearing shall be given to the Petitioner and a reasoned order shall be passed by the Customs Department in accordance with the law.
The Adjudicating Authority shall bear in mind that the gold chain is only 58 grams and the Petitioner had been a resident of Saudi Arabia for the last thirteen years. If the Petitioner was willing to re-export the gold chain, the same should also be considered by the Adjudicating Authority and the Nodal Officer should facilitate the same.
Thus, the Petition was disposed of.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
