https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270219 The Court held that freezing bank accounts and attaching properties without adjudication was illegal. The Petitioner's involvement in smuggling was acknowledged, but the Respondents' actions under the Customs Act required formal adjudication. The Petitioner's rights under the Constitution were recognized, allowing the de-freezing of bank accounts for business operations. Legal precedents were distinguished, emphasizing the need for adjudication before coercive measures. The Court ordered the issuance of a show cause notice and completion of adjudication within three months, maintaining the attachment of immovable properties. The Petitioner's constitutional rights were protected, and no costs were awarded. en-us Tue, 22 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 May 2016 17:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270219 The Court held that freezing bank accounts and attaching properties without adjudication was illegal. The Petitioner's involvement in smuggling was acknowledged, but the Respondents' actions under the Customs Act required formal adjudication. The Petitioner's rights under the Constitution were recognized, allowing the de-freezing of bank accounts for business operations. Legal precedents were distinguished, emphasizing the need for adjudication before coercive measures. The Court ordered the issuance of a show cause notice and completion of adjudication within three months, maintaining the attachment of immovable properties. The Petitioner's constitutional rights were protected, and no costs were awarded. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 22 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270219