The Patna High Court while quashing the seizure memo has held that Panchnama cannot be read into seizure memo and seizure officer cannot keep reasons in his mind and he has to disclose minimal reasons in the seizure memo.
The bench of Justice P. B. Bajanthri and Justice S. B. Pd. Singh has observed that reading of both the seizure memo and Panchnama, one can draw inference that firstly seizure memo has been prepared and secondly Panchnama has been drawn, therefore, at the time of writing seizure memo, Panchnama was not written or existed. This is evident from reading Panchnama.
The petitioners are into Areca Nuts business. The Customs officials intercepted and seized the truck. The vehicle was taken to the Customs office and the vehicle and Areca Nut goods were seized in the Customs office. For seizure of the truck and Areca Nut goods on 14.08.2020, seizure memo was drawn by the Seizing Office.
The petitioner contended that customs official has failed to comply Section 110 (1A), (1B), (1C) of the Act, 1962 insofar as drawing inventory conveyance (truck) and take certification from the Magistrate, therefore, on legal contentions, petitioners need not exhaust alternative remedy and seizure of memo read with Panchnama, it is evident that Panchnama was drawn subsequent to drawing up of seizure memo in view of the specific words narrated in the Panchnama relating to seizure memo. Petitioners are relying on Notification dated 05.02.1986 and in the notification, relates to Conveyance, therefore, for the purpose of compliance of Section 110 (1A), (1B), (1C) of the Act, 1962 , Customs Officials have failed to follow the provisions read with Notification dated 05.02.1986.
As per Notification dated 08.02.2017 these material information reflected in Panchnama was required to be taken into consideration while reading seizure memo may not be correct in the light of the fact that whatever contents of the Panchnama cannot be read into seizure memo.
The court quashed the seizure memo.
Read More: Top PMLA Judgements Favouring ED – 2024
Case Details
Case Title: Sukhdeo Singh Versus UOI
Case No.: Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7999 of 2020
Date: 05-12-2024
Counsel For Petitioner: Prabhat Ranjan
Counsel For Respondent: K.N.Singh
