2025 (11) TMI 1570

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lant has challenged the seizure of the betel nuts consignment. From the Seizure Memo and Panchnama, it is apparent that the consignment appeared liable to confiscation on the basis of local trade opinion regarding origin of the betel nuts. Morphological features of betel nuts, though not conclusive, are indicative of the origin thereof. Therefore, seizure of the goods on the basis of morphological features is justified. Thus, the impugned order of seizure is legally sustainable and is upheld. The appeal is dismissed." 2.1 Acting on the information, the Officers of Gorakhpur Customs intercepted a truck bearing Registration No. UP 17 AT 0875 at Tenua Toll Plaza on 24.02.2020 on its way to Delhi. On examination it was found that the vehicle....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2 128. Appeals to [Commissioner (Appeals)] [ Substituted by Act 22 of 1995, Section 50, for " Collector (Appeals)" and " Collector of Custom", respectively (w.e.f. 26-5-1995).] (1) Any person aggrieved by any decision or order passed under this Act by an officer of customs lower in rank than a Commissioner (Appeals) may appeal to the [Commissioner (Appeals) within sixty days from the date of the communication to him of such decision or order: Provided that the Commissioner (Appeals) may, if he is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from presenting the appeal within the aforesaid period of sixty days, allow it to be presented within a further period of thirty days. (1-A) The Comm....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....zed goods and an order on such request has been made. 4.6 In case of Jaymatajee Enterprises [AIRONLINE 2020 ALL 2150] Hon'ble Allahabad High Court has observed as follows: "On the basis of the arguments advanced at the bar, the first question to be considered is whether the alternative remedy of appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) is an efficacious remedy and in view of the said remedy, the writ petition cannot be entertained. We are in complete disagreement with the counsel for the respondents for the following reasons:- (i) No appeal lies against a seizure order; (ii) the goods detained are perishable in nature and considering the fact that relegating the petitioners to the appellate remedy woul....