https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192675 Clearance and removal of imported goods under Section 89 of the Sea Customs Act did not extinguish the customs authorities' power to proceed against a person for unlawful import under Section 167(8), because the penalty is personal and does not depend on the goods remaining within the customs barrier. The show-cause notice and ensuing enquiry were also not without jurisdiction or premature, as the authority was entitled to investigate whether the import complied with the licence and the law, and writ interference was unwarranted absent a patent lack of jurisdiction. The proceedings were therefore allowed to continue and the petition was dismissed at the threshold. en-us Mon, 28 Nov 1960 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Jun 2017 12:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192675 Clearance and removal of imported goods under Section 89 of the Sea Customs Act did not extinguish the customs authorities' power to proceed against a person for unlawful import under Section 167(8), because the penalty is personal and does not depend on the goods remaining within the customs barrier. The show-cause notice and ensuing enquiry were also not without jurisdiction or premature, as the authority was entitled to investigate whether the import complied with the licence and the law, and writ interference was unwarranted absent a patent lack of jurisdiction. The proceedings were therefore allowed to continue and the petition was dismissed at the threshold. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 28 Nov 1960 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192675