https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41338 Section 193 of the Sea Customs Act, 1878 did not permit recovery through a Magistrate where the penalty was imposed for the first time by the Chief Customs Authority, because that authority was not the original officer of customs contemplated by the recovery machinery. The Court also held that commutation of confiscation into penalty under Section 190 required proof of the owner's consent, and the record did not establish that condition. The recovery action based on the appellate penalty order was therefore not maintainable, and the alleged commutation order could not be sustained for want of the statutory consent. en-us Wed, 12 Apr 1961 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Jun 2014 17:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41338 Section 193 of the Sea Customs Act, 1878 did not permit recovery through a Magistrate where the penalty was imposed for the first time by the Chief Customs Authority, because that authority was not the original officer of customs contemplated by the recovery machinery. The Court also held that commutation of confiscation into penalty under Section 190 required proof of the owner's consent, and the record did not establish that condition. The recovery action based on the appellate penalty order was therefore not maintainable, and the alleged commutation order could not be sustained for want of the statutory consent. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 12 Apr 1961 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41338