https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96504 A customs seizure was treated as procedurally defective where the seizure memo and panchnama did not disclose the statutory source of seizure power, and the de novo proceedings did not afford effective opportunity. Statements relied on by the department were found involuntary because they were recorded after prolonged custody, retracted promptly, and supported by complaints of coercion, so the evidentiary basis for personal penalties was unsafe; those penalties were set aside. The confiscation of foreign-origin gold was nonetheless upheld, as the challenge to seizure did not displace the confiscatory consequence on the facts, particularly where the appellants did not assert ownership of the goods. en-us Fri, 10 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Jan 2012 17:41:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96504 A customs seizure was treated as procedurally defective where the seizure memo and panchnama did not disclose the statutory source of seizure power, and the de novo proceedings did not afford effective opportunity. Statements relied on by the department were found involuntary because they were recorded after prolonged custody, retracted promptly, and supported by complaints of coercion, so the evidentiary basis for personal penalties was unsafe; those penalties were set aside. The confiscation of foreign-origin gold was nonetheless upheld, as the challenge to seizure did not displace the confiscatory consequence on the facts, particularly where the appellants did not assert ownership of the goods. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 10 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96504