9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (4) TMI 34X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner by the officers of opposite parties 1 and 2 on 26-9-1976. By Annexure 5 dated 30-6-1977, the petitioner was informed to take delivery of the goods seized from him, excluding the seized primary gold and the trunk from which gold was recovered on depositing Rs 4,379.96 paise towards the expenditure incurred for transportation, storage, security arrangement etc. for the said valuables. 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 4,379.96 has been demanded from the petitioner on account of expenditure incurred by the Customs Department for storing the said goods at different places as stated above. It is quite evident from the Counter that the said goods were not kept in any `warehouse' as defined under the Customs Act, 1962. `Warehouse' has been defined under sub-section (43) of Section 2 of the Customs Act (hereinaft ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icensed." There is nothing on record to show that either the District Treasury at Sambalpur or the Sambalpur Divisional Office of the Customs Department in which the said articles and goods were kept, was ever appointed or licensed as a public or private warehouse under the provisions of Section 57 or 58 of the Act. The goods were seized from the petitioner's premises. So it was for the Departmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
