SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 25884

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Mohammed Shaffiq, J
M/s Sandhya Aqua Exports Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
The Deputy Commissioner of Customs (BRC-DBK) – Respondent
WP No. 6974 of 2026 and WMP Nos.7585 and 7586 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: S.Baskaran
For the Respondents: Mr.H.Siddarth Standing Counsel for R1

Ex-parte order set aside for lack of proof of show cause notice service under Customs Act.

Headnote:First Paragraph: Relevant provisions under Section 153 of the Customs Act, 1962 mandate proper service of show cause notices and intimation of personal hearings. Petitioner challenged an ex-parte order passed without service of notice dated 20.03.2023 or intimation of hearings on 06.03.2024, 14.03.2024, and 25.03.2024. Court found no material proving service, violating natural justice principles (paras 2, 4). Second Paragraph: Key issue framed as whether notices were served on petitioner as required under law (para 2). Ratio: Absence of proof of service renders ex-parte order invalid; court cannot uphold proceedings without evidence of compliance (para 4). Third Paragraph: Writ petition disposed; impugned order set aside, treated as show cause notice, fresh proceedings directed with hearing opportunity (para 4).

Table of Content
1. challenges ex-parte order for non-service of notices. (Para 1)
2. no proof of notice service or hearing intimation. (Para 2)
3. order set aside; fresh proceedings with hearing directed. (Para 4)
4. petition disposed without costs. (Para 5)

ORDER

The present writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned exparte order in original No.112385/2025 dated 13.03.2025 on the short ground that neither show causes notice dated 20.03.2023 nor personal hearings fixed on 06.03.2024, 14.03.2024 and 25.03.2024, were served on petitioner nor intimated to petitioner.

2. To a pointed question to learned Standing Counsel for respondents, whether there is any material to show that show cause notice had been served on petitioner and the personal hearings had been duly intimated in terms of Section 153 of the Customs Act to petitioner, he would submit that there is no material to support, while asserting that show cause notice was in fact served and personal hearings were in fact intimated.

3. Heard the counsels and perused the materials available on record.

4. In the absence of any material to demonstrate that notices were actually served as was sought to be asserted, this Court is inclined to dispose of writ petition with following directions:

i) Impugned order dated 13.03.2025 is set aside;

ii) Petitioner shall treat the impugned order as a show cause notice and submit his reply/objection before the adjudicating authority, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order;

iii) The adjudicating authority shall proceed to pass final orders, in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks thereafter, after affording petitioner an opportunity of hearing.

5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. There will be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top