https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45684 A customs order alleging involvement in illegal import under the Sea Customs Act was quashed because the incriminating material was not properly disclosed and the petitioner was not given a fair opportunity to answer it. The High Court held that alleged oral admissions and airmail letters, without details of the admissions, the persons to whom they were made, or proof connecting the letters to the petitioner, could not sustain a quasi-judicial finding of complicity. Suspicion could not replace proof, and the absence of supporting evidence and fair hearing vitiated the order. en-us Wed, 24 Jul 1963 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Jul 2010 12:17:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45684 A customs order alleging involvement in illegal import under the Sea Customs Act was quashed because the incriminating material was not properly disclosed and the petitioner was not given a fair opportunity to answer it. The High Court held that alleged oral admissions and airmail letters, without details of the admissions, the persons to whom they were made, or proof connecting the letters to the petitioner, could not sustain a quasi-judicial finding of complicity. Suspicion could not replace proof, and the absence of supporting evidence and fair hearing vitiated the order. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 24 Jul 1963 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45684