No SCN or Order for 1 Year after Delhi Customs Seized 5 iPhones from Hong Kong Passenger: Delhi HC Orders Release [Read Order]
The Delhi High Court noted that the continued detention of the goods were untenable owing to the lapse of time and lack of initiation of process.
![No SCN or Order for 1 Year after Delhi Customs Seized 5 iPhones from Hong Kong Passenger: Delhi HC Orders Release [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/08/12/2075936-iphones-seized-taxscan.webp "No SCN or Order for 1 Year after Delhi Customs Seized 5 iPhones from Hong Kong Passenger: Delhi HC Orders Release [Read Order]")
In a recent order, the Delhi High Court directed the release of five iPhones seized by the Customs Department, noting that the continued detention had become untenable as no show cause notice (SCN) or Order-in-Original was issued even after a year from the seizure. The petitioner, Yakin Yunus Patel had approached the Court seeking release of the detained goods which had been seized...
In a recent order, the Delhi High Court directed the release of five iPhones seized by the Customs Department, noting that the continued detention had become untenable as no show cause notice (SCN) or Order-in-Original was issued even after a year from the seizure.
The petitioner, Yakin Yunus Patel had approached the Court seeking release of the detained goods which had been seized by the Customs at Indira Gandhi International Airport while he and his family members arrived in India from Hong Kong on May 3, 2024.
Want a deeper insight into the Income Tax Bill, 2025? Click here
The Petitioner, represented by Dr. Ashutosh, Fatima and Parvej Hassan made out a case that the 5 iPhones were seized by the Customs vide a detention receipt dated May 3, 2024, however no SCN was issued despite the lapse of more than one year from the date of seizure.
It was further alleged that no Order-in-Original had been passed or served by the Customs; accordingly, the petitioner sought the release of the seized goods.
Senior Standing Counsel Harpreet Singh, Suhani Mathur and Sanidhya Sharma appearing for the Customs submitted that the petitioner had signed the standard waiver of SCN and accordingly, no notice was issued to them. It was further stated that three opportunities for personal hearing were granted to the petitioner, but he had failed to appear for the same..
How to Audit Public Charitable Trusts under the Income Tax Act Click Here
The Division Bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta observed that since no SCN had been issued despite the passage of more than a year, the time period contemplated in Section 110 of the Customs Act had lapsed and further detention had become untenable.
Accordingly, the Delhi High Court disposed of the petition, directing the petitioner to appear before the Customs Department and furnish any documents he wished to rely upon. The customs were directed to consider such submissions and documents, and since no SCN had been issued, the detained goods were directed to be released to the petitioner.
However, the Court directed that the petitioner should pay the entire warehousing charges for the detention, following which the five iPhones would be released.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscanpremium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
