https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288952 A detention order based on alleged smuggling was held vitiated because the detaining authority failed to consider material documents showing ownership and lawful acquisition of the goods. For goods not covered by Chapter IV-A or section 123 of the Customs Act, the department had to establish that they were smuggled, and mere foreign origin or a general statement of purchase from passengers was insufficient to draw that inference. The omission to place receipts and correspondence before the authority amounted to non-application of mind and undermined the subjective satisfaction underlying detention. en-us Wed, 16 Jun 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Jul 2020 16:33:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288952 A detention order based on alleged smuggling was held vitiated because the detaining authority failed to consider material documents showing ownership and lawful acquisition of the goods. For goods not covered by Chapter IV-A or section 123 of the Customs Act, the department had to establish that they were smuggled, and mere foreign origin or a general statement of purchase from passengers was insufficient to draw that inference. The omission to place receipts and correspondence before the authority amounted to non-application of mind and undermined the subjective satisfaction underlying detention. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 16 Jun 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288952