https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45607 The court interpreted "substantial portion" in Section 115(1)(e) of the Customs Act, 1962 as item-specific rather than totality-based, allowing confiscation if a significant amount of any one item is missing. The Additional Collector's order imposing a fine of Rs. 50,000 in lieu of confiscation was deemed justified. The court upheld the confiscation of the vessel for missing cigarettes, emphasizing the importance of preventing smuggling. The respondent's challenge under Article 226 was dismissed due to available remedies under the Customs Act. The appeal was allowed, setting aside the Trial Judge's decision. en-us Thu, 17 Aug 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Jul 2010 17:31:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45607 The court interpreted "substantial portion" in Section 115(1)(e) of the Customs Act, 1962 as item-specific rather than totality-based, allowing confiscation if a significant amount of any one item is missing. The Additional Collector's order imposing a fine of Rs. 50,000 in lieu of confiscation was deemed justified. The court upheld the confiscation of the vessel for missing cigarettes, emphasizing the importance of preventing smuggling. The respondent's challenge under Article 226 was dismissed due to available remedies under the Customs Act. The appeal was allowed, setting aside the Trial Judge's decision. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 17 Aug 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45607