M.N. CHANDURKAR, CJ

Even after hearing the learned counsel for the appellants at considerable length we are not satisfied that there is any infirmity in the order of the learned single judge. In his order the learned judge has held that the petitioners are bound to appear in pursuance of the summons under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and that they are not entitled to have the presence of a lawyer at the time when their statement is recorded. As we fully endorse the reasons given and the view taken by the learned Judge while dismissing the writ petitions, we do not think it necessary to deal in extenso with the arguments advanced before us. However, since the matter has been argued at considerable length we might briefly indicate the two contentions and the reasons for rejecting them.

2.The first contention was that a summons under Section 108 of the Act cannot be issued unless an enquiry as contemplated by Section 124 of the Act is commenced by a notice to show cause as to why either the goods should not be confiscated or that penalty should not be imposed on the persons concerned. Reliance has been placed for this view on the