Page 163 - ELT_15th July 2020_Vol 373_Part 2

Law

2020 (373) E.L.T. 145 (Cal.)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
I.P. Mukerji and Md. Nizamuddin, JJ.
RUJIRA NAROOLA
Versus
UNION OF INDIA
M.A.T. No. 538 of 2019 with C.A.N. No. 3912 of 2019, decided on 8-4-2019
1
Summons - Issuance of - In response to police complaint of noticee
about harassment, intimidation and threat, Customs only complained of no-
ticee’s obstruction under Section 133 of Customs Act, 1962 - Allegation of ille-
gal import of gold/other goods made about seven days later in summons is-
sued under Section 108 ibid - HELD : Prima facie, Customs summons could not
have covered contravention alleged by them, and even if it was covered, sum-
mons should have recital of new allegation against notice - Prima facie, only
question before High Court was whether summons under Section 108 ibid
could have been issued in aid of investigation by Customs of offence under
Section 133 ibid - It was substantial question of law to be decided by High
Court. [paras 26, 27, 28]
Summons - Response to - Summons issued about 11 days after inci-
dent and returnable 12 days after issuance - HELD : Summon was issued belat-
edly and there was no urgency for noticee to answer it - Summons made re-
turnable by later date - Section 108 of Customs Act, 1962. [para 30]
Writ jurisdiction - Exercise of - Question of law has to be tried on ex-
change of affidavits - It is not sufficient to pass interim order without reasons
after narration of submissions - Article 226 of Constitution of India. [para 29]
Appeal disposed of
________________________________________________________________________
1 On appeal from 2020 (373) E.L.T. 42 (Cal.).
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th July 2020  163