Case Details: Goldie Sud vs. Commissioner of Customs (2026) 40 Centax 61 (Bom.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Jitendra Jain & M.S. Sonak, JJ.
- Dr Sujay Kantawala a/w Ms Aishwarya Kantawala, Shri Jeffry Caleb & Ms Ayushi Jha i/by Anita U. Sonurlekar, for the Petitioner.
- Ms Nithee Punde a/w Shri Harshad Shingnapurkar, for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner arrived in India as an in-transit passenger, carrying approximately 3.696 kg of gold. This gold was declared at the Red Channel, and the petitioner requested permission for its re-export. A show-cause notice was issued, and the gold was subsequently seized. It was also noted that on at least three previous instances, the petitioner had arrived in India carrying gold, declared it at the Red Channel, and sought permission for re-export, which was granted in each instance. The petitioner challenged the show cause notice and requested the release of the seized gold. The matter was then placed before the High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that the show cause notice was based on factual allegations requiring adjudication and, therefore, did not warrant interference in writ jurisdiction. It was further held that the petitioner’s repeated conduct of arriving in India with gold and seeking its re-export, coupled with the quantity of gold involved, raised suspicion warranting further investigation. The question of whether the petitioner was involved in smuggling or had breached any legal provisions would be determined in the adjudication proceedings. Accordingly, the Court declined to exercise writ jurisdiction or order the release of the seized gold. However, the Court directed that the department shall not sell the seized gold pending the disposal of the adjudication proceedings.
