https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45630 Territorial jurisdiction was treated as maintainable for a pre-execution writ challenge to a detention order where the detenu was resident within the court's reach and the challenge fell within recognised exceptions to pre-execution restraint. The Court distinguished smuggling from wrong declaration or misdescription of goods, holding that the facts disclosed, at most, a customs offence and not smuggling or attempted smuggling warranting preventive detention under COFEPOSA. It also found the detention order unsustainable because it rested on a solitary incident, lacked prior material showing smuggling propensity, and reflected non-application of mind. Preventive detention was quashed, though customs prosecution could continue. en-us Fri, 20 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Jul 2010 09:44:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45630 Territorial jurisdiction was treated as maintainable for a pre-execution writ challenge to a detention order where the detenu was resident within the court's reach and the challenge fell within recognised exceptions to pre-execution restraint. The Court distinguished smuggling from wrong declaration or misdescription of goods, holding that the facts disclosed, at most, a customs offence and not smuggling or attempted smuggling warranting preventive detention under COFEPOSA. It also found the detention order unsustainable because it rested on a solitary incident, lacked prior material showing smuggling propensity, and reflected non-application of mind. Preventive detention was quashed, though customs prosecution could continue. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 20 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45630