Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
Jurisdiction of Preventive officer to initiate any proceeding including proceeding u/s 110(1) - Show Cause Notice for seized goods - The High Court determined that the Preventive Officer did not have the jurisdiction to initiate proceedings at the airport, which falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Principal Commissioner of Customs (Airport and Air Cargo Complex), Kolkata. - The seizure did not comply with Section 110(1) of the Customs Act as the Preventive Officer did not record the necessary satisfaction for believing the goods were liable for confiscation. - Consequently, the actions taken by the Preventive Officer were declared non-est (invalid), and the goods were ordered to be returned to the petitioner.
Jurisdiction of Preventive officer to initiate any proceeding including proceeding u/s 110(1) - Show Cause Notice for seized goods - The High Court determined that the Preventive Officer did not have the jurisdiction to initiate proceedings at the airport, which falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Principal Commissioner of Customs (Airport and Air Cargo Complex), Kolkata. - The seizure did not comply with Section 110(1) of the Customs Act as the Preventive Officer did not record the necessary satisfaction for believing the goods were liable for confiscation. - Consequently, the actions taken by the Preventive Officer were declared non-est (invalid), and the goods were ordered to be returned to the petitioner.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
