Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/5 vs The Union Of India And 3 Ors on 12 November, 2021
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010139182021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/4760/2021
NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN AND 2 ORS
DIRECTOR OF M/S RARA BROTHERS PVT. LTD., S/O LATE MAHABIR
PRASAD JAIN, R/O 7TH FLOOR, POONAM PALACE, A.T. ROAD, GUWAHATI,
ASSAM-781001
2: M/S RARA BROTHERS PVT. LTD
THROUGH THE DIRECTOR
MR. NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN
1ST AND 2ND FLOOR OF SHIW MARKET
FANCY BAZAAR
GUWAHATI
ASSAM-781001
3: MRS. SANDHYA JAIN
W/O SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN
R/O 7TH FLOOR
POONAM PALACE
A.T. ROAD
GUWAHATI
ASSAM-78100
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS
THROUGH SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF
REVENUE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001
2:ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL
DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE
GUWAHATI REGIONAL UNIT
H. NO. 6
KRISHNANGAR
CHANDMARI
GUWAHATI-781003 (ASSAM)
Page No.# 2/5
3:ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL
DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE
KOLKATA ZONAL UNIT 8
HO-CHI-MINH SARANI
SUITE NO. 16 AND 17
KOLKATA-700071 (WEST BENGAL)
4:ADJUDICATIING AUTHORITY
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTIVE)
NORTH EAST REGION 110
MAHATMA GANDHI ROAD
SHILLONG-793001
MEGHALAY
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR R GAUR
Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.
Linked Case : I.A.(Civil)/1485/2021
NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN AND 2 ORS
DIRECTOR OF M/S RARA BROTHERS PVT. LTD.
S/O LATE MAHABIR PRASAD JAIN
R/O 7TH FLOOR
POONAM PALACE
A.T. ROAD
GUWAHATI
ASSAM-781001
2: M/S RARA BROTHERS PVT. LTD
THROUGH THE DIRECTOR
MR. NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN
1ST AND 2ND FLOOR OF SHIW MARKET
FANCY BAZAAR
GUWAHATI
ASSAM-781001
3: MRS. SANDHYA JAIN
W/O SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN
R/O 7TH FLOOR
POONAM PALACE
A.T. ROAD
GUWAHATI
ASSAM-781001
VERSUS
Page No.# 3/5
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS
THROUGH SECRETARY
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
NORTH BLOCK
NEW DELHI-110001
2:ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL
DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE
GUWAHATI REGIONAL UNIT
H. NO. 6
KRISHNANGAR
CHANDMARI
GUWAHATI-781003 (ASSAM)
3:ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL
DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE
KOLKATA ZONAL UNIT 8
HO-CHI-MINH SARANI
SUITE NO. 16 AND 17
KOLKATA-700071 (WEST BENGAL)
4:ADJUDICATIING AUTHORITY
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTIVE)
NORTH EAST REGION 110
MAHATMA GANDHI ROAD
SHILLONG-793001
MEGHALAYA
------------
Advocate for : MR R GAUR
Advocate for : ASSTT.S.G.I. appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK
12/11/2021
Heard Mr. R Gaur, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. K Gogoi, learned Central
Government counsel for the respondent No. 1. Also heard Mr. S C Keyal, learned Standing
counsel, DRI for the respondent Nos. 2, 3 & 4.
It is submitted that the respondents in the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence
searched the business premises of the petitioners and during such search on 23.09.2016
seized (i) 87 pieces of Raw Silver Bars weighting about 60.740 Kgs. and (ii) 12 packets of 5
Page No.# 4/5
Kgs. each Raw Silver Bars weighting about 60 Kgs. in the form of small balls/granules, all
together 120.740 Kgs. which at the relevant point of time of seizure valued at Rs.57,95,520/-
in the open market.
The Additional Director General, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence respondent No. 2
on 15.09.2017 vide No. DRI F.NO. 15/DRI/ Enquiry/GAU/16-17/3236 issued show cause
notice to the petitioners under Section 124 of Customs Act, 1962, asking them as to why the
seized silver bars, silver balls/granules should not be confiscated under Section 111(b) & (d)
of the Customs Act, 1962, for being smuggled into India through unauthorized channel, in
contravention to the provisions of the Foreign Trade Policy and the Customs Act, 1962 and as
to why penalty should not be imposed upon them, i.e., the 'Noticees' under Section 112 (b) &
(d) of the said 1962, Act. On receipt of the same, the petitioners on 06.01.2018 submitted
their reply before the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), North Eastern Region, Customs
House, Shillong.
It is submitted by the petitioners that the respondents in the Customs Department is
yet to conclude the case which is pending since last more than 5 years and thereby harassing
the petitioners for no reason.
It is also contended by the petitioners that the Hon'ble Supreme Court by judgment
dated 09.03.2021 passed in Civil Appeal No. 1827/2018 in the case of M/S. Canon India
Private Limited Vs. Commissioner of Customs has held that the Additional Director General of
the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence is not the appropriate authority to issue show cause
notice under the provisions of the Customs Act.
Mr. Gaur, learned counsel for the petitioners from the records of cross-examination of
the concerned Investigating Officer of the case recorded on 14.06.2019, annexed with the
petition and placed by the Investigating Officer specifically stated that during the
investigation they could not ascertain as to from which country the seized silver bars found in
the possession of petitioners have been imported nor they could find as to who brought the
said silver bars into the country and since no one from the company came to explain
regarding the possession of the silver bars; it was assumed that the silver bars were illegally
Page No.# 5/5
imported by the Noticees of the case, i.e., the petitioners herein.
For the aforesaid reasons, the petitioners have stated that since the respondents have
failed to prove the fact that the seized silver bars have been smuggled into India, the
petitioners should not be harassed and those silver items seized in the case should be
returned to them.
Issue notice, returnable by 08.12.2021.
As Mr. K Gogoi, learned Central Government counsel and Mr. S C Keyal, learned
Standing counsel, DRI have accepted notice on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to 4
respectively, no formal notice need to be issued to those respondents.
Petitioners shall serve requisite extra copies of this writ petition along with the
annexures appended thereto to Mr. K Gogoi, learned Central Government counsel and Mr. S C
Keyal, learned Standing counsel, DRI by 16.11.2021, obtaining necessary acknowledgment
from them in that regard.
List accordingly.
The interim prayer of the petitioners shall be considered on the returnable date, after
filing of the affidavit by the respondents in the DRI.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
