https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767974 Preventive detention under COFEPOSA was sustained on the basis of material indicating involvement in a smuggling syndicate, recovery of foreign-origin gold and cash, and a statement recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act. The Court declined to reappreciate the detainee's claim that the statement was coerced or that the cash had an innocent source. It also held that the pendency of a criminal complaint, custody, or later bail did not by itself invalidate preventive detention because prosecution and detention operate in different fields. The alleged communication delay was rejected, as the order was promptly executed, representation rights were intimated, the Advisory Board process was followed, and confirmation was duly communicated. en-us Mon, 17 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Mar 2025 08:31:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767974 Preventive detention under COFEPOSA was sustained on the basis of material indicating involvement in a smuggling syndicate, recovery of foreign-origin gold and cash, and a statement recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act. The Court declined to reappreciate the detainee's claim that the statement was coerced or that the cash had an innocent source. It also held that the pendency of a criminal complaint, custody, or later bail did not by itself invalidate preventive detention because prosecution and detention operate in different fields. The alleged communication delay was rejected, as the order was promptly executed, representation rights were intimated, the Advisory Board process was followed, and confirmation was duly communicated. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 17 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767974