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 the presumption under Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962 could be invoked when the goods were first seized by the police and later handed over to customs, and whether absolute confiscation should be modified to permit redemption on payment of fine.
Analysis: The goods were not seized from the appellant's possession by customs authorities but were initially taken by the police and thereafter transferred to customs. In such a situation, the statutory presumption under Section 123 could not be applied against the appellant on the footing that the goods were seized from his possession. The finding of contravention was nevertheless maintained, as the appellant had admitted the charge. Considering the nature of the goods and their value, the order of absolute confiscation was found excessive, and redemption was considered appropriate.
Conclusion: The invocation of Section 123 was held inapplicable on the facts, the finding of contravention was confirmed, absolute confiscation was set aside, and the appellant was permitted to redeem the goods on payment of a fine of Rs. 2,500 while the penalty was sustained.
Ratio Decidendi: Where goods are first seized by the police and only later handed over to customs, they are not treated as seized from the possession of the appellant for the purpose of Section 123 of the Customs Act, 1962, and the statutory burden under that provision cannot be invoked on that basis.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
