Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Customs petition dismissed: Currency in trousers not personal effects, liable for confiscation</h1> The court dismissed the petition filed by the Department of Customs under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. challenging orders for the release of seized goods, ... Confiscation of personal belongings - whether wearing apparels were neither the personal effects nor the jamatalashi? - Held that:- The record shows that on 26th April, 2006, order was for release of goods which have been seized vide personal search memo which are not liable for confiscation and are not required for the purpose of investigation including the Jama talashi be released as per rules passed only after No objection has been given by Sr.P.P. Similarly, vide order dated 29th September, 2006, wearing apparels and articles of personal and daily use, which were not the case property, were ordered to be released. If the Custom Department had any grievance against the orders dated 29th September, 2006 and 13th October, 2006, then the appropriate remedy was to file appeal/revision. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. does not lie, since there is no abuse of process of any Court. Hence, the present petition u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. is without any legal substance and it is dismissed with costs of ₹ 5,000/-. Issues:1. Challenge to orders dated 29th September, 2006 and 13th October, 2006 passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate.2. Release of goods seized by the Customs department.3. Interpretation of wearing apparels and articles of personal search under the Customs Act, 1962.4. Application for recalling of the release order.5. Legal remedy available against the challenged orders.Analysis:1. The Department of Customs filed a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to challenge the orders dated 29th September, 2006 and 13th October, 2006 passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi. The orders pertained to the release of goods seized from the respondents, including currency concealed in trousers found in a suitcase.2. The Customs department contended that the wearing apparels used for concealing currency were not personal effects and were liable for confiscation under the Customs Act, 1962. The release of such goods was argued to be contrary to the law. The court examined the nature of the seized goods and the provisions of the Customs Act to determine their confiscability.3. An application for recalling the release order was made by the Customs department on 9th October, 2006, which was dismissed by the ACMM on 13th October, 2006. The court reviewed the arguments presented by both parties and the legal basis for recalling the order, emphasizing the need for adherence to legal procedures.4. The judgment highlighted the legal remedies available to challenge the orders, emphasizing the importance of following due process. Reference was made to previous judgments to illustrate the principle that specific legal remedies, such as appeals or revisions, should be pursued before invoking the inherent jurisdiction of the court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.5. Ultimately, the court found the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to be lacking legal merit and dismissed it with costs imposed on the petitioner. The judgment emphasized the need for parties to exhaust available legal remedies before seeking intervention through inherent powers of the court, citing relevant case law to support this principle.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found