https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296240 The Court determined that the power of the Collector of Customs under the proviso to Section 110(2) of the Customs Act is quasi-judicial, requiring a judicial approach and an opportunity for the affected party to be heard before an extension is granted. Regarding the extension of the period for giving notice under Section 124(a), the Court held that the right to restoration of goods becomes absolute upon the expiry of the initial or extended period, and any extension granted after this period is invalid as it defeats the vested right of the respondent. The appeal was dismissed, upholding the restoration of seized watches to the respondent. en-us Tue, 09 Feb 1971 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Jul 2021 12:52:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296240 The Court determined that the power of the Collector of Customs under the proviso to Section 110(2) of the Customs Act is quasi-judicial, requiring a judicial approach and an opportunity for the affected party to be heard before an extension is granted. Regarding the extension of the period for giving notice under Section 124(a), the Court held that the right to restoration of goods becomes absolute upon the expiry of the initial or extended period, and any extension granted after this period is invalid as it defeats the vested right of the respondent. The appeal was dismissed, upholding the restoration of seized watches to the respondent. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 09 Feb 1971 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296240