Back
G. S. KULKARNI, JITENDRA S. JAIN
Jayendra Chandulal Thakkar – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
G.S. Kulkarni, J.
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Respondents waive service.
By consent of the parties heard finally.
2. This petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, although has number of prayers, the principal challenge as mounted by the petitioner is to an order dated 29 November, 2017 passed by the Principal Commissioner & Ex-officio Additional Secretary to Government of India, by which the revision application filed by the petitioner under Section 129DD of the Customs Act, 1962, has been rejected. By the impugned order, the order dated 08 October, 2013 being an order in appeal passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai-III, dismissing the petitioner’s appeal, has been confirmed.
3. Briefly the facts of the case are:-
As it was observed that the movements of the petitioner were suspicious, the petitioner was intercepted by the officers of the Customs Air Intelligence Unit at Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport, Sahar, Mumbai on 14 March, 2006. The petitioner declared himself to be a passenger travelling from Mumbai to Doha by Qatar Airways flight No. QR 201. As set out in detail in the show cause notice dated 11 Se
The court emphasized the limited jurisdiction of interference under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution and upheld the findings of the authorities below unless there is patent perversity and ill....
Foreign citizen - Confiscation of the case property i.e foreign currency from possession – Permission to travel on deposit of 50% of seized currency justified.
Foreign citizen - Confiscation of the case property i.e foreign currency from possession – Permission to travel on deposit of 50% of seized currency justified
The right to travel, while not absolute, must be considered alongside the principles of justice, personal circumstances of the accused, and legal obligations in smuggling cases.
Customs authorities lack jurisdiction to adjudicate issues under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, making actions of confiscation and penalties under the Customs Act legally untenable.
Mis-declaration of goods' value and purpose justifies confiscation under the Customs Act, 1962.
Personal jewelry worn by travelers qualifies as personal effects exempt from customs duties, regardless of its value, unless explicitly defined otherwise in customs regulations.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
