No Invoice or E-Way Bill at Time of Interception: Gauhati HC refuses to Release Customs Seized ₹2.22cr Areca Nuts [Read Order]

The Gauhati High Court has refused to order the release of areca nuts worth approximately ₹2.22 crore seized by Customsauthorities as the seizure was valid and there was reason to believe for such seizure.

Justice Pranjal Das found that no supporting documents were submitted before the customs authorities during the time of interception and also driver’s act of assaulting officials and absconding constituted relevant material forming “reason to believe” under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962.

A writ petition was filed by Sarvadeva Vanijya Pvt. Ltd., challenging the seizure of 33,600 kilograms of areca nuts packed in 480 bags along with a transport vehicle by Customs officials near Dimapur on November 6, 2025. The goods were initially suspected to be of foreign origin and were seized under Section 110 of the Customs Act.

The petitioner claimed that the seized areca nuts were moved to their godown in Guwahati via stock transfer after being locally purchased in Assam. They argued that the seizure was unlawful because Customs did not have the required "reason to believe" under Section 110 of the Customs Act and instead acted based only on suspicion.

Additionally the petitioner stated that any GST documentation issues strictly fall under GST jurisdiction. The company also challenged the refusal to provisionally release their goods and vehicles.

Opposing the petition, Customs argued the vehicle carrying ₹2.22 crore in areca nuts lacked any valid transport documents upon interception, justifying a reasonable belief of illegal transport. The driver allegedly assaulted a customs official during the interception and fled from the spot, strengthening suspicions regarding the legitimacy of the consignment, stated the department.

GST Audit & Assessment notices are increasing... The question is: Are you prepared to handle them confidently? Practical Guide to Assessment & Audit under GST Grab your copy Now:

The Department also justified the seizure by stating that the seizure was based on the specific intelligence on northeastern areca nut smuggling. Further investigation revealed discrepancies including an unregistered GST dispatch location, the failure to generate an e-way bill, and deficiencies in the documents the petitioner subsequently provided.

The court examined the scope of Section 110 of the Customs Act and observed that a proper officer may seize goods if there exists a reasonable belief that the goods are liable to confiscation. It observed that the validity of a seizure under Section 110 has to be tested on the basis of materials available at the time of seizure. Documents produced subsequently cannot retrospectively validate the transportation or negate the basis on which the customs officer formed a reasonable belief.

Consequently, the court refused to release the seized areca nuts. However, it ordered the release of the vehicle to the driver who is a third party.

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