2003 (4) TMI 449

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eceipt of information, the officers of the New Custom House, New Delhi, conducted raid on the residential premises of the appellant located on the first floor, T-7, DCM Road, Kishan Ganj, Delhi and effected the recovery of 3 zipper rexin carry bags which contained 928 computer parts of foreign origin. The officers seized all those computer parts and prepared the panchnama in that regard on the spot, as the appellant could not produce documents regarding the legal import and possession of those parts. This seizure was made under Section 110 of the Customs Act on the plea that the parts had been smuggled into India illegally and were liable for confiscation under the Customs Act. The recovery of the parts was not disputed by the appellant in ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ned Commissioner was wrongly influenced by these factors while passing the impugned order. The goods were seized from the residential premises situated on the first floor, T-7 DCM Road, Kishan Ganj, Delhi. The appellant was admittedly at that time not the owner of the premises. There is nothing on the record to suggest if any attempt was made to ascertain the ownership of that premises. At the time of raid, besides the appellant, another person, Mohd. Sohail was also present in that very room from where the goods were seized. That being so, it could not be said that the seized goods were recovered from the possession of the appellant alone. Rather legally, the recovery was in fact effected from the joint possession of both of them. But stra....