Back
SANDEEP MEHTA, ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) – Appellant
Versus
Nemluni D/o Suangkhankapa – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY, J.
1. Heard Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Senior standing counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. N. Dasgupta, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. The present appeals under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 are preferred assailing Final Order No. 75680-75682/2021 dated 10.11.2021 passed by the learned CESTAT, Kolkata in Custom Appeal No. 75235/2021 (Cus. Ref No. 1/2022), Custom Appeal No. 75234/2021 (Cus. Ref. No. 2/2022) and Custom Appeal No. 75236/2021 (Cus. Ref. No. 3/2022).
3. This batch of appeals were taken up for final determination together as the initial cause of action arose on similar factual background, the show cause notices issued to the parties/respondents are common and also the orders under challenge. All the Appeals were admitted by this court the under its order dated 16.02.2023 framing the following substantial questions of law:
(ii) Whether the CESTAT, Kolkata, has erred in law in setting aside the order of confiscation when seized goods were found to be unfi
Section 123 of Act, 1962 provides that where any goods included under Sub-section 2 of Section 123 are seized on basis of reasonable belief that same are smuggled goods, then burden of proving that t....
The burden of proof for non-notified goods under the Customs Act lies with the Customs Department to establish smuggling, which must be supported by cogent evidence.
The court validated the customs authority's seizure of goods based on reasonable suspicion, upholding the impossibility of judicial review on the sufficiency of the officer's reasons.
The court emphasized that interference at the stage of issuance of show cause notice should be rare and not in a routine manner, and the availability of alternative remedy should be considered before....
Seizure of goods under the Customs Act requires objective evidence to establish 'reason to believe' that goods are of foreign origin; mere suspicion or subjective opinions are insufficient.
Denial of redemption options in cases of absolute confiscation is lawful when goods are prohibited under the Customs Act due to non-compliance with Minimum Import Prices.
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
