SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1983 Supreme(All) 176

A.BANERJI, H.N.SETH
ALKA WATCHES PVT. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
H.S.SHARMA, K.C.Sinha

A. BANERJI, J.


( 1 ) THE principal question in this petition is whether the respondents are justified in withholding the seized goods belonging to the petitioner and whether they are liable to return the same to the petitioner no. 1.

( 2 ) THE officers of the Central Excise and Customs intercepted, seized certain imported goods at ghaziabad. Petitioner no. 1 claimed through its Managing Director, petitioner no. 2, that the goods belonged to petitioner no. 1 and had been imported by it through proper invoice and import permit. The petitioner claimed that the seized goods which are components of watches have not yet been returned to the petitioner. It was further pleaded that in view of the provisions of Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962, hereinafter referred to as the Act, it was mandatory for the respondents to have given a show cause notice as contemplated under Section 124 (a) of the Act within six months of the seizure of the goods, and since that was not done, they were liable to return the seized goods. The petitioners therefore claimed that the matter remained pending with the respondents and further proceeding before them was liable to be set aside and a direction be issu































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top