Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether plant, machinery and motor fixed to the earth could be seized and sealed under section 110 of the Customs Act read with rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules.
Analysis: Section 110 of the Customs Act authorises seizure of goods liable to confiscation, and the statutory definition of goods is confined to movable property. Property attached to the earth is immovable property and does not fall within that definition. Rule 173Q dealt with confiscation and not seizure; confiscation could follow only after adjudication establishing contravention with intent to evade duty. In the absence of any adjudication, the machinery and plant fixed to the earth could not be treated as goods liable to seizure under section 110, nor could rule 173Q be invoked to justify immediate seizure.
Conclusion: The seizure and sealing of the plant, machinery and motor were not permissible in law and the petitioner succeeded.
Final Conclusion: The impugned departmental action was set aside, and release of the seized plant, machinery and motor was directed, leaving the authorities free to proceed with adjudication in accordance with law.
Ratio Decidendi: Goods liable to seizure under section 110 of the Customs Act are confined to movable property, and plant and machinery permanently attached to the earth cannot be seized under that provision; confiscation provisions cannot be used to bypass the requirement of prior adjudication.