https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41296 Preventive detention under the COFEPOSA Act was sustained where the detenu's prior dealings in foreign and notified goods, earlier Customs Act penalties, and a later unexplained seizure from his premises formed relevant material for subjective satisfaction. The lapse of time did not render the antecedent conduct stale because it still bore on the likelihood of continued smuggling activity. The court also held that the availability of prosecution for the recent seizure did not bar preventive detention, since prosecution alone was not considered sufficient to prevent repetition of similar conduct. The detention order was upheld and the challenge failed. en-us Mon, 09 Aug 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Jun 2010 18:11:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41296 Preventive detention under the COFEPOSA Act was sustained where the detenu's prior dealings in foreign and notified goods, earlier Customs Act penalties, and a later unexplained seizure from his premises formed relevant material for subjective satisfaction. The lapse of time did not render the antecedent conduct stale because it still bore on the likelihood of continued smuggling activity. The court also held that the availability of prosecution for the recent seizure did not bar preventive detention, since prosecution alone was not considered sufficient to prevent repetition of similar conduct. The detention order was upheld and the challenge failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 09 Aug 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41296