01Facts
The petitioner challenged the Commissioner of Customs’ Order-in-Original dated 11 August 2026, alleging that it had been made using AI without independent application of mind.
p. 2The petitioner pointed to two judgments attributed to the Supreme Court which, it said, did not exist in any law report or database and appeared to be AI hallucinations. Its request for copies of those judgments was not met.
p. 2The petitioner relied on Vijay Ghanshyam Gadiya v. Union of India & Anr., 2026 INSC 947, which discussed the use of AI-generated authorities in adjudication.
pp. 2–3The respondents consented to the impugned order being quashed and the matter remanded.
p. 402Issues
i.Whether the Order-in-Original should be set aside because it allegedly relied on non-existent, AI-generated judgments without independent application of mind.
pp. 1–3ii.Whether the matter should be remanded to the Commissioner of Customs for a fresh decision.
p. 403Law Applied
The Court referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in Vijay Ghanshyam Gadiya v. Union of India & Anr., 2026 INSC 947, quoting its discussion of Pooja Ramesh Singh v. Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd.
pp. 2–3The quoted passage states that courts and advocates must verify authorities and that reliance on fake or hallucinated AI-generated precedents is impermissible; AI may assist adjudication but cannot substitute for it.
pp. 2–3The Bombay High Court did not identify or apply a specific statutory provision, and it made no independent determination of the alleged AI use; the order was set aside by consent.
p. 404Reasoning
The petitioner alleged that the Commissioner’s order relied on two non-existent Supreme Court judgments, raising the concern addressed in the authority cited by the petitioner: adjudicative assistance from AI cannot replace human decision-making, and purported precedents must be verified.
pp. 2–3The respondents agreed that the order could be quashed and the matter remanded.
p. 4The Court therefore disposed of the challenge by consent, without making a finding on whether AI had been used or whether the alleged citations were in fact fabricated.
p. 405Holding
By consent, the Court quashed and set aside the Order-in-Original dated 11 August 2026 and remanded the matter to the Commissioner of Customs for a fresh order.
p. 4The petitioner was directed to appear before the Commissioner on 5 November 2026 at 11:00 a.m.; the proceedings were to be concluded within eight weeks from that date.
p. 4The writ petition was disposed of.
p. 4Original Court PDF
Quanta Logistics Pvt LtdvsCommissioner Of Customs Import-I
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
