https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171557 An extension of time for issuing notice under the proviso to Section 110(2) of the Customs Act had to be made within the original six-month seizure period. Once that period expired without a valid extension, the owner's right to return of the seized goods became enforceable and could not be defeated by a later retrospective order. A subsequent extension under the Gold Control Act did not cure the defect where the seizure was under the Customs Act. The impugned extension was therefore invalid, and return of the seized property followed, subject to the excluded gold guineas not claimed by the owner. en-us Mon, 24 Apr 1972 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Jul 2015 11:34:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171557 An extension of time for issuing notice under the proviso to Section 110(2) of the Customs Act had to be made within the original six-month seizure period. Once that period expired without a valid extension, the owner's right to return of the seized goods became enforceable and could not be defeated by a later retrospective order. A subsequent extension under the Gold Control Act did not cure the defect where the seizure was under the Customs Act. The impugned extension was therefore invalid, and return of the seized property followed, subject to the excluded gold guineas not claimed by the owner. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 24 Apr 1972 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171557