https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795582 Airport security interception and temporary detention of a passenger carrying undocumented electronic goods after customs clearance constituted lawful preventive action, not an unauthorised customs seizure. CISF secured the passenger and goods on security grounds and transferred them to police and Customs without exercising customs-enforcement powers. Customs officers subsequently effected seizure after handover, with search safeguards including disclosure of rights, presence of a Gazetted Officer, consent, panchanama, inventory and independent witnesses. Because the initial interception was not a customs seizure, it did not invalidate the later seizure, summons or investigation. The passenger could not claim denial of a voluntary declaration after leaving the customs area without approaching Customs. en-us Tue, 09 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Jul 2026 08:36:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795582 Airport security interception and temporary detention of a passenger carrying undocumented electronic goods after customs clearance constituted lawful preventive action, not an unauthorised customs seizure. CISF secured the passenger and goods on security grounds and transferred them to police and Customs without exercising customs-enforcement powers. Customs officers subsequently effected seizure after handover, with search safeguards including disclosure of rights, presence of a Gazetted Officer, consent, panchanama, inventory and independent witnesses. Because the initial interception was not a customs seizure, it did not invalidate the later seizure, summons or investigation. The passenger could not claim denial of a voluntary declaration after leaving the customs area without approaching Customs. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 09 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795582