The Bombay High Court recently set aside a customs department order after taking note of concerns that the adjudicating authority had relied on non-existent, artificial intelligence (AI) generated Supreme Court judgments [Quanta Logistics Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs (Import-I)].

A Bench of Justices MS Karnik and Sandesh D Patil quashed an August 11, 2026 order passed by the customs commissioner against Quanta Logistics.

Quanta argued that the customs authority passed the order by resorting to AI without an independent application of mind. Senior Advocate Venkatesh Dhond demonstrated that the order cited two Supreme Court judgments that did not exist in any database, describing them as possible AI hallucinations. When Quanta requested for copies of the cited judgment, the department failed to provide the same.

The petitioner relied on the 2026 Supreme Court decision in Vijay Ghanshyam Gadiya v. Union of India, in which the apex court had emphasised on a "zero-tolerance" approach to tackling the use of AI-generated precedents without due verification.

In response, the Customs department agreed that the order under challenge could be quashed and the matter reconsidered.

Consequently, the High Court quashed the Customs order by consent and directed the petitioner to appear before the authority so that the matter can be examined afresh.

Dhond appeared along with advocates Bimal Rajasekhar and Sunand Subramaniam for Quanta.

Advocates Jitendra B Mishra and Sangeeta Yadav appeared for the Customs department. 

[Read order]