Just a moment...

Top
Help
Upgrade to AI Search

We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:

1. Basic
Quick overview summary answering your query with referencesCategory-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI

2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
Detailed report covering:
     -   Overview Summary
     -   Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
     -   Relevant Case Laws
     -   Tariff / Classification / HSN
     -   Expert views from TaxTMI
     -   Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy

• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:

Explore AI Search

Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites

×

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.
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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 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: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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 :

        1992 (6) TMI 110 - AT - Customs

        📋
        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

        Customs officials ordered to pay Rs. 1,66,170 for wrongful seizure. The Tribunal ordered the Collector of Customs (Preventive), West Bengal, and the Assistant Collector of Customs, Krishnagar Customs Division, to pay Rs. ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Customs officials ordered to pay Rs. 1,66,170 for wrongful seizure.

                            The Tribunal ordered the Collector of Customs (Preventive), West Bengal, and the Assistant Collector of Customs, Krishnagar Customs Division, to pay Rs. 1,66,170/- to the applicant as the market price of the goods by 1st September 1992. This decision aimed to compensate the applicant for the pecuniary loss due to the wrongful seizure and sale of the goods, aligning with the principle that the market value should be the value determined by the department at the time of seizure.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Calculation of market price of seized goods.
                            2. Acceptance of the market price determined by the Customs Department.
                            3. Determination of correct market value based on evidence provided by the applicant.
                            4. Compliance with previous Tribunal orders regarding payment of market value.

                            Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Calculation of Market Price of Seized Goods:
                            The applicant, Sri Samsuddin Sheikh, contested that the market value of the seized goods, calculated at Rs. 4.28 per piece, was arbitrary and lacked a basis. The goods in question were 16,617 pieces of old/used readymade garments (long pants) of foreign origin. At the time of seizure, the department valued the goods at Rs. 1,66,170/-. The applicant provided evidence, including several annexures, indicating that the value of the garments during August/September 1989 was Rs. 15 to 16 per piece. The Tribunal had previously ordered that the market value of the goods as on 11-9-1989 should be paid to the applicant.

                            2. Acceptance of the Market Price Determined by the Customs Department:
                            The Collector of Customs, West Bengal, stated that a wide market survey revealed no open market for old and used readymade garments, and no seller kept authentic documents for such items. The N.C.C.F., a Government of India agency, bought similar consignments at Rs. 4.28 per piece in 1985. The department argued that the value of Rs. 71,121/- was correctly determined based on this market survey and requested the Tribunal to order payment at this rate.

                            3. Determination of Correct Market Value Based on Evidence Provided by the Applicant:
                            The applicant's counsel, Shri K. Chatterjee, argued that the market value should be based on the rate at which the garments were sold and purchased publicly, not the rate used by cooperative organizations. He contended that the market value should be Rs. 15 per piece, totaling Rs. 2,49,255/-, but the applicant would be satisfied if the seizure value was accepted as the market value. The Tribunal referred to previous decisions, including the case of M/s. Oswal Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, Calcutta, which established that the market value should be the value as on the date of the order setting aside the confiscation.

                            4. Compliance with Previous Tribunal Orders Regarding Payment of Market Value:
                            The Tribunal noted that the Customs department had sought permission to sell the garments, which was rejected by the Magistrate of Murshidabad district. Despite this, the department sold the goods while the appeal was pending. The Tribunal emphasized that the applicant should be compensated for the pecuniary loss, placing him in the same position as if the goods were available in their original condition. The Tribunal concluded that the market value should be the value determined by the department at the time of seizure, which was Rs. 1,66,170/-.

                            Conclusion:
                            The Tribunal ordered the Collector of Customs (Preventive), West Bengal, and the Assistant Collector of Customs, Krishnagar Customs Division, to pay Rs. 1,66,170/- to the applicant as the market price of the goods, to be carried out promptly by 1st September 1992. This decision was based on the principle that the applicant should be compensated for the pecuniary loss resulting from the wrongful seizure and sale of the goods.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found