https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766207 Preventive detention under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act was examined in the context of an accused already in custody, where the record showed specific intelligence, seizure of foreign-origin gold, recovery of foreign currency, and a statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act. The detention was supported by material indicating a live apprehension of future prejudicial conduct, and the court reiterated that preventive detention is distinct from criminal prosecution and is not barred merely because criminal proceedings are pending. The challenge based on alleged delay in communication was rejected because the order was executed, grounds were served, representations were considered, and statutory review steps were followed. en-us Mon, 17 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Feb 2025 08:02:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766207 Preventive detention under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act was examined in the context of an accused already in custody, where the record showed specific intelligence, seizure of foreign-origin gold, recovery of foreign currency, and a statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act. The detention was supported by material indicating a live apprehension of future prejudicial conduct, and the court reiterated that preventive detention is distinct from criminal prosecution and is not barred merely because criminal proceedings are pending. The challenge based on alleged delay in communication was rejected because the order was executed, grounds were served, representations were considered, and statutory review steps were followed. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 17 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766207