https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41999 Import control policy instructions, without backing from a statutory order or notified prohibition, cannot by themselves sustain confiscation under customs law; on that footing, the confiscation, redemption fine and personal penalty were set aside. The Court also held that service of mandatory notices and receipt of consequential orders at the petitioners' Bombay address formed part of the cause of action under Article 226 because such notice was integral to confiscatory proceedings and the petitioners were affected there by payment of fine and penalty. Territorial jurisdiction was therefore upheld in favour of the petitioners. en-us Thu, 27 Aug 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Jun 2010 14:59:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41999 Import control policy instructions, without backing from a statutory order or notified prohibition, cannot by themselves sustain confiscation under customs law; on that footing, the confiscation, redemption fine and personal penalty were set aside. The Court also held that service of mandatory notices and receipt of consequential orders at the petitioners' Bombay address formed part of the cause of action under Article 226 because such notice was integral to confiscatory proceedings and the petitioners were affected there by payment of fine and penalty. Territorial jurisdiction was therefore upheld in favour of the petitioners. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 27 Aug 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41999