HC held that seizure under Customs Act s.110(1) requires proper ...

Customs Officer Must Record Detailed Written Grounds for Seizure Under Section 110(1), Not Just Cite Legal Provisions

February 28, 2025

Case Laws Customs HC

HC held that seizure under Customs Act s.110(1) requires proper officer to record specific written reasons demonstrating belief that goods are liable for confiscation. Mere citation of statutory provisions without explaining their applicability is insufficient. While the seizure memo was quashed for lacking detailed grounds, the show cause notice was sustained. The court emphasized that goods must be returned if notice under s.124(a) is not issued within 6 months of seizure, subject to valid extensions. Though provisional release occurred after 6 months with two 3-month extensions, investigation can proceed under Customs Act despite invalidation of seizure. The ruling balances procedural safeguards with enforcement powers.

View Source

← Previous Next →

HC held that seizure under Customs Act s.110(1) requires proper ...

Customs Officer Must Record Detailed Written Grounds for Seizure Under Section 110(1), Not Just Cite Legal Provisions

February 28, 2025

Case Laws Customs HC

You may also like:

Smuggling - burden to prove - invocation of Section 123 - the statement recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 made before the customs officers is not a...

Assessment proceedings against one of the legal heirs - deceased/assessee had admittedly more than one legal representatives - Despite the legal heir's explicit...

Provision for bad and doubtful debts u/s 36(1)(viia) against the advances of rural branches - The circular mentions that the provisions of new clause (viia) of section...

Jurisdiction of Preventive officer to initiate any proceeding including proceeding u/s 110(1) - Show Cause Notice for seized goods - The High Court determined that the...

Addition u/s 41(1) - benefit by way of remission or cessation of liability - In the instant case, the first mentioned person is the assessee, but not the creditor. In...

Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - recording of specific finding or not? - In para 7 of the penalty order u/s. 271(1)(c), the Assessing Officer held that it is found to be a fit...

ITAT examined residential status dispute of NRI taxpayer under Income Tax Act section 6(1) and applicable DTAA provisions. Appellant demonstrated presence in India for...

The document outlines provisions regarding customs bonds and bank guarantees. Key points from the legal analysis: The obligor must comply with all provisions of the...

Jurisdiction - power of DRI to issue SCN - Proper Officer - Officers from Group-B who are already from the Customs Department can be appointed as “Officers of Customs”....

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) held that every non-compliance with a notice u/s 142(1) gives a separate cause of action for levying penalty u/s 271(1)(b)....

Levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - Addition of LTCG - Assessing Officer while recording satisfaction has invoked both the charges of section 271(1)(c) - ambiguity and...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - non recording of satisfaction - When satisfaction for initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of IT Act is recorded by the AO in...

The Appellate Tribunal examined the reopening of assessment u/s 147 beyond the limitation period, involving the addition of cash deposits in the assessee's savings bank...

HC ruled penalty proceedings under sections 271D and 271E require explicit satisfaction to be recorded by Assessing Officer during reassessment. Mere recording of...

The Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that grounds of arrest must be communicated in writing to the arrested person, relying on Supreme Court judgments. It distinguished...

Quick Updates: