9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 720X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for provisional release in terms of Section 110A of the said Act. The purported tax invoice and supporting documents disclosed herein creates more than an element of suspicion as regards ownership of the petitioner in respect of the goods in question. The petitioner has not been able to establish its right of ownership over the goods and the same appears to be a disputed, however, without going into such an issue at this stage, the order of seizure passed by the Inspector of Customs (Preventive) and the Superintendent of Customs (Preventive) do not suffer from any jurisdictional error. No case for interference has been made out. Petition dismissed. - HON BLE JUSTICE RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY For the Petitioner : Mr. Mainak Bose, Adv. Mr. Shanta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 24. The petitioner is the owner in respect of the aforesaid goods. By drawing attention of this Court to the two inventory cum seizure of the goods memos seized under Section 110 of the said Act, it is submitted that the Superintendent of Customs (Preventive) and the Inspector of Customs (Preventive) did not have jurisdiction to seize the said goods inasmuch as the seizure was effected outside the jurisdictional area of the said Customs Officers. By placing reliance on the notification dated 24th August, 2017, it is submitted that the Government of India, Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) Central Board of Excise and Customs in exercise of power conferred under Section 4(1) of the said Act, and in suppression of the notification of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stream of the northern limit of Kolkata Port, and all lands as are within 10 kilometers of high water mark at spring tide on either side of the river; (ii) The Andaman and Nicobar Islands; (iii) FALTA Special Economic Zone. 4. Having regard to the aforesaid, it is submitted that the Customs Officers (Preventive) did not have the jurisdiction to initiate any proceeding including proceeding under Section 110(1) of the said Act, since, the Customs Officers mentioned in Column (3) of the Table 2 under serial no.10 of the aforesaid notification by reasons of specified jurisdictional area delineated for such officers, it is such officers who have the exclusive jurisdiction to deal with the matter falling within their jurisdictional area. Since, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g any smuggled gold, however, he later tendered five pieces of yellow metal believed to be gold of foreign origin, to the Customs Officers. Immediately the Officers had made him sit in the office vehicle along with the detected gold and the person concerned was brought along with the bike to the Head office in the Government vehicle. Later the aforesaid person was further interrogated and subsequently the inventory of the goods seized under Section 110 of the said Act was prepared at the Custom House office at Strand Road, Kolkata. Abu Khair Gazi was also intercepted near a paan shop at Haroa Bazar. After initial denial, the said Abu Khair Gazi had made over ten pieces of yellow metal believed to be gold of foreign origin and on recovery th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... further submits that the petitioner till date has not made any application for provisional release. The petitioner has also failed to establish by demonstrating any credible document that the petitioner is the owner of the goods in question. The purported tax invoice relied on by the petitioner is a suspect document. He submits that although, the tax invoice indicates that the gold is worth Rs. 1,50,17,965.30, yet only two fund transfers in support of the aforesaid transaction, totaling to Rs. 40 Lac have been disclosed, which are at pages 59 and 60 of the writ petition. Both those transactions had taken place subsequent to the seizure of the goods in question. In the facts noted hereinabove, it is submitted that the petitioner has only tak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order was issued within the domestic terminal of the Airport by the preventive officer of the Customs Authority, unlike the present case. The judgment delivered in the case of Md. Ahmed Ali Khan (supra) is also distinguishable on facts as the goods in question in the said case landed at Calcutta Dock and was later shifted to CFS Balmer Lawrie, when the goods were examined and seized. This judgment also does not assist the petitioner. It may, however, be noted that the proper Officers in the instant case, being the Officers under the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), West Bengal, had reasons to believe that smuggled gold was being transported and accordingly had set up a plan to intercept the smuggled gold at Haroa Bridge and at Haroa B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
