https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44300 The court upheld the jurisdiction of Customs Authorities to detain/seize goods under Section 110 of the Customs Act, emphasizing that goods can be seized if there is reason to believe they are liable to confiscation, despite clearance under Section 47. The court found that Customs Authorities had objective materials to form a reasonable belief for the seizure. It ruled that petitioners were not entitled to release goods before completion of investigation and adjudication proceedings. The court directed the authorities to issue a notice under Section 124(1) of the Act promptly and granted a potential extension of the license validity if confiscation proceedings favored the petitioners. en-us Fri, 22 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Jun 2010 13:11:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44300 The court upheld the jurisdiction of Customs Authorities to detain/seize goods under Section 110 of the Customs Act, emphasizing that goods can be seized if there is reason to believe they are liable to confiscation, despite clearance under Section 47. The court found that Customs Authorities had objective materials to form a reasonable belief for the seizure. It ruled that petitioners were not entitled to release goods before completion of investigation and adjudication proceedings. The court directed the authorities to issue a notice under Section 124(1) of the Act promptly and granted a potential extension of the license validity if confiscation proceedings favored the petitioners. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 22 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44300