Case Details: Yash Chadha vs. Commissioner of Customs (2026) 40 Centax 96 (Del.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Prathiba M. Singh & Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, JJ.
- S/Shri Parminder Singh Sandhu, Mayank Ahuja, Pradeep Chaurasia & Abhishek Sharma, Advs., for the Petitioner.
- Shri Arun Khatri, Adv., for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner sought the release of a gold chain weighing 45 grams detained by the Customs Department and submitted that, though a detention receipt had been issued, no show cause notice had been issued even after the expiry of the period prescribed under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962. It was further submitted that no appraisal of the gold chain had been carried out to date. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that once goods are detained, issuance of a show cause notice and grant of a personal hearing are mandatory under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962. It held that though the statute permitted extension of the initial six-month period by a further period of six months, even the extended period had elapsed in the present case without issuance of a show cause notice. The High Court therefore held that the continued detention of the gold jewellery was impermissible and not tenable in law. Accordingly, the detention was set aside, and the release of the detained jewellery was directed.
List of Cases Cited
- Directorate of Revenue Intelligence v. Pushpa Lekhumal Tolani — 2017 (353) E.L.T. 129 (S.C.) — Relied on [Para 7]
- Makhinder Chopra v. Commissioner — 2025 (394) E.L.T. 391 (Del.) = (2025) 32 Centax 50 (Del.) — Relied on [Para 10]
- Saba Simran v. Union of India — 2025 (394) E.L.T. 403 (Del.) = (2025) 27 Centax 34 (Del.) — Relied on [Para 8]
- Union of India v. Saba Simran — 2025 (394) E.L.T. 27 (S.C.) = (2025) 32 Centax 132 (S.C.) — Relied on [Para 9]
