https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53948 Confiscation of seized goods could not be sustained where the claimant asserting ownership was kept out of the adjudication, was not served the show cause notice, and was denied a hearing. The absence of notice and participation violated natural justice and deprived the claimant of an opportunity to explain its claim to the goods, so the confiscation order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh adjudication. The claimant was also treated as a person aggrieved because the confiscation directly affected its asserted legal interest in the consignment, giving it locus standi to challenge the order. en-us Fri, 08 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Oct 2010 11:04:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53948 Confiscation of seized goods could not be sustained where the claimant asserting ownership was kept out of the adjudication, was not served the show cause notice, and was denied a hearing. The absence of notice and participation violated natural justice and deprived the claimant of an opportunity to explain its claim to the goods, so the confiscation order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh adjudication. The claimant was also treated as a person aggrieved because the confiscation directly affected its asserted legal interest in the consignment, giving it locus standi to challenge the order. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 08 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53948