https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45569 Section 12 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 was read as validly extending Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 into excise matters through the notification, so that goods liable to confiscation could be seized and detained. The expression "goods" was given its ordinary grammatical meaning, and the absence of a separate definition in the excise statute did not justify excluding a vehicle used to transport dutiable goods without payment of duty. Section 115 of the Customs Act also supported confiscation where a vehicle was used in connection with liable goods. Rule 200 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was treated as a search provision and not a limit on the seizure power. en-us Tue, 27 Jun 1967 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Jul 2010 15:31:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45569 Section 12 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 was read as validly extending Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 into excise matters through the notification, so that goods liable to confiscation could be seized and detained. The expression "goods" was given its ordinary grammatical meaning, and the absence of a separate definition in the excise statute did not justify excluding a vehicle used to transport dutiable goods without payment of duty. Section 115 of the Customs Act also supported confiscation where a vehicle was used in connection with liable goods. Rule 200 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was treated as a search provision and not a limit on the seizure power. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 27 Jun 1967 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45569