TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕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%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a Magistrate could order return of a truck under Section 523 of the Criminal Procedure Code when the truck and seized goods had already been taken into customs custody and seized by a proper officer under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962.
Analysis: The seizure initially made by the police did not establish that the matter remained within Section 523 of the Criminal Procedure Code, because the record showed that the truck and the smuggled goods were thereafter taken to the customs house and expressly seized under the Customs Act by the customs authorities. Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 authorises a proper officer, where he has reason to believe that goods are liable to confiscation, to seize such goods wherever they are found. The Act also contains special powers relating to search, seizure, confiscation, and assistance by police officers under the customs framework. The authorities relied upon by the respondent were distinguished because they dealt with seizures under the Criminal Procedure Code or with search-warrant situations where the Magistrate retained control of the seized articles. In the present matter, the customs seizure had already taken place under the Customs Act before the application to the Magistrate, so the Magistrate could not exercise disposal powers under Section 523 over property already validly seized by customs.
Conclusion: The Magistrate had no jurisdiction to pass the impugned order, and the order directing return of the truck was liable to be set aside.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
