Delhi High Court - Orders
Arjun Singh & Anr vs Commissioner Of Custom on 2 September, 2025
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
$~66
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 13436/2025 & CM APPL. 55149/2025
ARJUN SINGH & ANR. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Harvinder Singh, Adv.
versus
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOM .....Respondent
Through: Ms. Anushree Narain, SSC with Mr.
Naman Choula, Adv.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL
ORDER
% 02.09.2025
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioners under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution India, inter alia, seeking release of the following goods of the Petitioner:
i. iPad Pro - 2 units
ii. iPad Air - 2 unit
iii. iPad - 1 unit
iv. HP Laptop - 1 unit
v. Apple Laptop - 1 unit
vi. iPhone 14 Pro - 2 units
vii. iPhone 13 Pro - 1 unit
viii. iPhone 12 Pro MAX - 2 units
ix. iPhone XS MAX - 2 units
x. iPhone 12 - 3 units
xi. iPhone 11 - 3 units
xii. iPhone X - 6 units
xiii. iPhone 8 - 2 units
xiv. Samsung Galaxy A34 - 4 units
xv. Samsung Android Mobile - 11 units
xvi. Android Mobiles - 3 units
xvii. Sony Camera - 1 unit
W.P.(C) 13436/2025 Page 1 of 5
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/09/2025 at 22:33:50 xviii. Walkie Talkie - 1 unit xix. Samsung Tab - 1 unit The said goods have been detained vide detention receipt bearing no. DR/INDEL4/30-08-2024/005018 dated 30th August 2024.
3. Petitioner No.2- Mr. Harwinder Singh has filed the present petition as Power of Attorney holder of Petitioner No. 1- Mr. Arjun Singh. Petitioner No. 2 has appeared in person today. It is his case that the detention of the goods took place on 30th August, 2024 and the one year period for issuance of SCN under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 has already lapsed. Accordingly, the Petitioner prays for release of the seized goods.
4. Ms. Anushree Narain, ld. SSC for the Respondent submits that the seized goods are dutiable and even though the Show Cause Notice (hereinafter, 'SCN') has not been issued, the duty would still have to be paid. Ms. Narain submits that the Petitioner, for the said purpose, can appear before the Customs Department, pursuant to which an order in accordance with law would be passed in terms of Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962. Ms. Narain, ld. SSC further submits that the Petitioner agreed to waive the SCN on 30th August, 2024.
5. Heard. A perusal of the record would show that the goods were detained on 30th August, 2024 through detention receipt bearing number DR/INDEL4/30-08-2024/005018. Under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 a duty is cast upon the Customs Department to issue an SCN within a period of six months and even which is extendible by another six months, if the conditions are satisfied. However, the SCN has not been issued in this matter and hence, the goods are liable to be released in terms of Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962.
W.P.(C) 13436/2025 Page 2 of 5This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/09/2025 at 22:33:50
6. This Court has held repeatedly that standard pre-printed waivers of SCN and personal hearing would not be valid in law. The same has been held in Amit Kumar v. The Commissioner of Customs, 2025:DHC:751- DB. The relevant portion of the said order reads as under:
"16. A perusal of Section 124 of the Act along with the alleged waiver which is relied upon would show that the oral SCN cannot be deemed to have been served in this manner as is being alleged by the Department. If an oral SCN waiver has to be agreed to by the person concerned, the same ought to be in the form of a proper declaration, consciously signed by the person concerned. Even then, an opportunity of hearing ought to be afforded, inasmuch as, the person concerned cannot be condemned unheard in these matters. Printed waivers of this nature would fundamentally violate rights of persons who are affected. Natural justice is not merely lip-service. It has to be given effect and complied with in letter and spirit.
17. The three-pronged waiver which the form contains is not even decipherable or comprehensible to the common man. Apart from agreeing as per the said form that the oral SCN has been served, the person affected has also waived a right for personal hearing. Such a form in fact shocks the conscience of the Court, that too in cases of the present nature where travellers/tourists are made to run from pillar to post for seeking release of detained goods.
[...]
19. This Court is of the opinion that the printed waiver of SCN and the printed statement made in the request for release of goods cannot be considered or deemed to be an oral SCN, in compliance with Section 124. The SCN in the present case is accordingly deemed to have not been W.P.(C) 13436/2025 Page 3 of 5 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/09/2025 at 22:33:50 issued and thus the detention itself would be contrary to law. The order passed in original without issuance of SCN and without hearing the Petitioner, is not sustainable in law. The Order-in-Original dated 29th November, 2024 is accordingly set-aside."
7. Accordingly, in view of the settled law discussed above the detention can no longer continue. The position today is that these seized goods are liable to be released to the Petitioner but the question is under what terms.
8. The facts in this petition are similar to the facts in W.P. (C) 9582/2025 titled Krishnan Subbaiah vs. Commissioner of Customs where vide order dated 18th August, 2025 the Court held as under:
"4. It is the case of the Petitioner that, though the detention receipt was issued to the Petitioner, till date no Show Cause Notice (SCN) has been issued and no Order- in-Original has been passed. This fact is also now confirmed by ld. counsel for the Respondent.
5. Under such circumstances, since the goods are dutiable goods, the detained items deserve to be released under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962.
6. Accordingly, the Petitioner shall appear for appraisement on 11th September, 2025 before the competent authority and upon payment of duties and warehousing charges as applicable on the date of the detention, the goods shall be released to the Petitioner.
7. It is also clarified that if the Department wishes to pursue any other action against the Petitioner, it is free to do so in accordance with law and the present order shall not impede the initiation of such proceeding in any manner.
8. At this stage, ld. Standing Counsel to the Respondent -W.P.(C) 13436/2025 Page 4 of 5
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/09/2025 at 22:33:50 Department points out that the passport of the Petitioner has also not been annexed with the writ petition and prays for the Petitioner's identity be verified prior to release. Ordered accordingly."
9. Considering the fact that no SCN was issued in this matter and the time for issuance of the same has already been lapsed, let the Petitioner appear for appraisement on 22nd September, 2025, considering that the goods are dutiable goods.
10. A Nodal Officer, as mentioned below, shall assist the Petitioner to appear before the concerned authority so that the goods can be released after payment of customs duty and warehousing charges:
Mr. Sandeep Lamba, Superintendent, Customs Office of Commissioner, Customs IGI Airport, T-3, New Delhi Mobile No. 7405345000 Email Id: [email protected]
11. The Petitioner shall pay the duty and the warehousing charges as applicable on the date of detention and the seized goods shall be released to the Petitioner.
12. The Customs Department is free to take any other action as it deems appropriate, in accordance with law.
13. The present petition is disposed of in the above terms. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.
ANISH DAYAL, J.
SEPTEMBER 2, 2025/kp/ck/sm W.P.(C) 13436/2025 Page 5 of 5 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/09/2025 at 22:33:50