https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42513 The court dismissed the appellant's challenge of search and seizure jurisdiction, upholding the authority of customs officers to conduct searches and seize goods believed to be liable for confiscation. The appellant's arguments regarding the legality of the search and seizure were considered premature as no final assessment had been completed. The court emphasized that such factual disputes cannot be addressed under writ jurisdiction. The goods were released to the appellant under certain conditions, with the court clarifying that the final court order would not hinder authorities from conducting the assessment after notifying the appellant. The appeal was disposed of without prejudice to the appellant's right to raise further points post final assessment. en-us Tue, 06 Dec 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 Jun 2010 16:59:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42513 The court dismissed the appellant's challenge of search and seizure jurisdiction, upholding the authority of customs officers to conduct searches and seize goods believed to be liable for confiscation. The appellant's arguments regarding the legality of the search and seizure were considered premature as no final assessment had been completed. The court emphasized that such factual disputes cannot be addressed under writ jurisdiction. The goods were released to the appellant under certain conditions, with the court clarifying that the final court order would not hinder authorities from conducting the assessment after notifying the appellant. The appeal was disposed of without prejudice to the appellant's right to raise further points post final assessment. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 06 Dec 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42513