A. K. SARKAR, B. P. SINHA, J. R. MUDHOLKAR, M. HIDAYATULLAH, N. RAJAGOPALA AYYANGAR
Collector Of Customs, Madras: Nathella Sampathu Chetty: Puran Singh: Kewal Krishan: Krishan Lal: Attorney General For India: Soni Narandas Nagjibhai: Pukhraj: M. S. Venkitanarayana Iyer – Appellant
Versus
Nathella Sampathu Chetty: Collector Of Customs, Madras: State Of Punjab: State Of Punjab: State Of Punjab: State Of Punjab: State Of Punjab: D. R. Kohli: Collector Of Central Excise, Madras – Respondent
Judgment
AYYANGAR, J. : The Sea Customs Act, 1878 (Act 8 of 1878) (referred to hereinafter as the Act) was amended by S. 14 of Central Act 21 of 1955 by the introduction of S. 178A reading:
"178A. (1) Where any goods to which this section applies are seized under this Act in the reasonable belief that they are smuggled goods, the burden of proving that they are not smuggled goods shall be on the person from whose possession the goods were seized.
2. This section shall apply to gold, gold manufactures, diamonds and other precious stones, cigarettes and cosmetics and any other goods which the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, speedy in this behalf.
3. Every notification issued under sub-section (2) shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament as soon as may be after it is issued."
2. It is the constitutional validity of this section that is the common point which arises in these several cases which have been heard together. We have heard on the merits only Civil Appeals 408 to 410 of 1960 and the other cases were posted before us in order that Counsel appearing for the parties in them, might have an opportunity to be heard upon the common question mentione
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.