Customs confiscation requires valid notice to the owner or authorised agent before proceedings can continue.

Customs confiscation proceedings could not be sustained where the statutory notice was served only on the company accountant and not on the vehicle owner or a duly authorised agent. The notice-and-hearing requirements under the Customs Act are a mandatory precondition to confiscation, and service on a person without shown authority does not satisfy that safeguard. As proper notice to the owner was absent, the confiscation process could not validly continue against the petitioner company. The vehicle was therefore directed to be returned, with liberty reserved to the authorities to proceed in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the customs authorities could proceed to confiscate the conveyance when the statutory notice under the Customs Act was served only on the accountant and not on the owner of the vehicle or its duly authorised agent.

Analysis: The confiscation scheme required compliance with the notice and hearing requirements before an order of confiscation could be made. The notice relied upon was addressed to the accountant of the company, who was neither the owner of the motor vehicle nor shown to be a duly authorised agent authorised to receive notice on behalf of the owner. In the absence of proper notice to the owner, the statutory precondition for continuing confiscation proceedings was not satisfied.

Conclusion: The customs authorities could not proceed against the petitioner company on the basis of that notice, and the vehicle was directed to be returned while leaving liberty to proceed in accordance with law.

---