Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Search > Phrase: customs act 1962 section 24 > Year: 1965

Dec 09 1965 (SC)

Seth Durgaprasad Etc. Vs. H.R. Gomes

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 1983(13)ELT1501(SC)

..... the power derived from rule 126l(2) of the defence of india (amendment) rules 1963 - rule 126l(2)(hereinafter called the 'gold control rules') and sections 105 and 110 of the customs act, 1962 (hereinafter called the 'customs act'). 2. civil appeal no. 678 of 1965 : this appeal arises out of special civil application no. 490 of 1963 which relates to the search and seizure ..... 24, 1963 issued by the assistant collector of customs, raipur to the superintendent of central excise at nagpur under s. 105 of the customs act which reads as follows : 'shri h. r. gomes, superintendent (prev.) h. qrs., central excise, nagpur. whereas information has been laid before me of the suspected commission of the offence under section 11 read with section 111 of the customs act 1962 (52 of 1962 ..... appellants mr. pathak referred to the decision of this court in gian chand v. the state of punjab [1962] 1 s.c.r. 364.. in that case, the question debated was whether the presumption under s. 178a of the sea customs act, 1878 - section 178 would arise in respect of an article which was originally seized by the police and handed over to ..... may be, apply to searches under this section subject to the modification that sub-section (5) of section 165 of the said code shall have effect as if for the word 'magistrate', wherever it occurs, the words 'collector of customs' were substituted.' 24. according to the appellant the power of seizure under s. 105 of the customs act cannot be exercised unless the assistant collector .....

Tag this Judgment!
Mar 29 1965 (HC)

The Union Bank of India Ltd. Vs. M. Pachappa

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1967)69BOMLR782

..... of the said licence, together with some other papers, had been taken into possession by an officer of the special investigation branch, customs.3. thereafter a summons dated september 10, 1962, under section 171a of the sea customs act, 1878, was served on the petitioner bank. by the summons the bank was called upon to produce certain documents in connection with the importation of ..... or direction under article 226 of the constitution to quash and set aside an order of confiscation passed by respondent no. 1, the additional collector of customs, bombay, under section 167(5) of the sea customs act, 1878, in respect of property which had been pledged with the petitioner bank.2. the facts leading to the order of confiscation are not in dispute ..... in proceedings relating' to their confiscation.11. the answer to mr. rege's argument is that neither the terms of section 182 of the sea customs act, 1878, nor the aforesaid rules framed under section 9(c) of the act prevent a customs officer from issuing a notice and giving a proper hearing to a person whose interests are likely to be adversely affected by ..... , in that the order was passed behind its back and without giving it any hearing. ;6. respondent no. 1, the additional collector of customs, stated in his affidavit in reply that on or about july 24, 1962, the bombay customs house had received information that the said import licence of messrs. paramount steel industries, varanasi, was 'fraudulently obtained'. respondent no. 1 added that .....

Tag this Judgment!
May 21 1965 (HC)

Kishanlal Agarwalla Vs. Collector of Land Customs

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1967Cal80,69CWN864

..... the burden of proof is shifted to the alleged smuggler under section 178-a of the sea customs act the goods seized must be goods seized under that act. section 9 of the land customs act provides for the application of the sea customs act and in the schedule of the land customs act are given the sections of sea customs act which are made applicable for the purpose of levy of duties on ..... land customs. that schedule includes sections 178-a as well as 178 of the sea customs act, among other sections. therefore, 'goods seized under this act' in section 178-a ..... the appellant's goods certainly has become time barred under limitation.23. in any event, we are however, satisfied on the facts that there has been no substitution at all.24. finally, mr. bhabra for the appellant contends that the adjudication in this case has violated the principles of natural justice. the way he formulates his charge of violation of natural .....

Tag this Judgment!
Sep 28 1965 (HC)

A.S. Bava Vs. Collector of Customs and ors.

Court : Kerala

Reported in : AIR1966Ker195

..... upon the second of the contentions urged by the petitioner's coun-sel, that the relevant provision for depositing duty, applicable if at all, is section 189 of the sea customs act, 1878 and not section 129 of the customs act, 1962. we may however indicate that on the facts of the actual decision, and on the principle laid down by the supreme court in 1953-4 ..... , or during the pendency of the appeal section 189 of the sea customs act, 1878 and section 129 of the customs act, 1962, according to us, seem to insist upon deposit as a condition precedent to filing the appeal. we are in agreement with the decision in digvijaysinhji spinning and ..... matter relating to procedure: (2) that the provision regarding the deposit of duty, applicable if at all, is section 189 of the sea customs act, 1878, and not section 129 of the customs act, 1962. 10. it is to be noticed that section 35 of the central excises and salt act, 1944 provides for appeals in unqualified terms without any limitation or requirement of deposit of duty prior to ..... a right of appeal conferred in unqualified terms by section 35 of the central excises and salt act can be alienated by a statutory rule such as rule 215 above. we express no opinion on the point. we may observe that rule 215 was deleted by notification of the government of india dated 24-1-1959. we may further observe that a view .....

Tag this Judgment!
Jan 27 1965 (HC)

Devi Chand Vs. Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1965AP415; 1965CriLJ602

..... to s. 3 of the imports and exports control act, 1947 read with s. 111(d) of the customs act, 1962. whereas you are liable to a penalty under section 112 of the customs act, 1962. (2) you are therefore called upon to show cause to the collector of customs and central excise, hyderabad within 5 days of receipt ..... 11/63, dated 29-7-1963, imposing on him a penalty of rupees 50,000/- under s. 112 of the customs act, 1962(hereinafter called 'the act') for having abetted the smuggling into indian customs waters of a large quantity of spice of the value of rs. 2.7 lakhs in a launch from ceylon and the ..... , narayanamudali street, madras - 1. whereas there is reason to believe that you have contravened s. 112(a) of the customs act, 1962, in that you have abetted the bringing into indian customs waters for the purposes of being imported 142 bags of cloves and 20 bags of nut-megs of foreign origin in a launch ..... , it cannot be said he had been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard in his defence, as envisaged by clause (c) of section 124 of the act. section 124 reads thus : 'no order confiscating any goods or imposing any penalty any on any person shall be made under this chapter unless the ..... be held that the adjudicatory process adopted the petitioner ' a reasonable opportunity of being heard' in answer to the charge, within the meaning of section 124(c) of the act. this amounted to such a denial of natural justice as to entitle this court to set aside those proceedings. (19) in the result, .....

Tag this Judgment!
Dec 06 1965 (HC)

P.S. Sadagopachari and anr. Vs. State

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1966Mad432; 1966CriLJ1452

..... special police establishment.such investigation was done in this case and normally, one would expect the special police to file the charge sheet in this case. but under sec. 187-a of the sea customs act (act viii of 1878), no court shall take cognisance of any offence relating to smuggling of goods punishable under item 81 of the schedule to s. 167 of ..... future after the enactment of the new customs act 52 of 1962. the collector of customs has preferred a complaint against the petitioners and others under s. 120b read with ss. 161, 165, 165-a i.p.c. sec. 5(2) read with sec. 5(1)(d) of the prevention of corruption act ii of 1947; sec. 5(2) of the said act read with s. 109 i.p ..... .c. and s. 167 clauses 75, 76 and 81 of the customs act read with ss. 19 and 5 of the imports and exports (control ..... to file charge sheet. under s. 137 of the customs act (act 52 of 1962) dealing with cognisance of offences, the collector of customs need only give sanction for the prosecution relating to certain offences under the customs act. hence, the special police could file charge sheet in future for offences under prevention of corruption act and other acts after obtaining the sanction of the collector in respect of .....

Tag this Judgment!
Mar 02 1965 (SC)

Harbhajan Singh Vs. State of Punjab

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1966SC97; 1966CriLJ82; [1965]3SCR235

..... sirhali,district amritsar. against this witness, cases were pending under s. 8(1) ofthe foreign exchange regulation act, s. 5(3) of the land customs act and s. 19 of the sea customs act. it has also been alleged against him that 140 tolas ofsmuggled gold had been found in his possession. ..... because it is plain that in dealing with the question of good faith the highcourt has misdirected itself materially on point of law.13. section 499 of the code defines defamation. it is unnecessary to set outthe said definition, because it is common ground that the impugned statementpublished by ..... he was also prosecuted by mr.dhir, magistrate, tarn taran, under the indian arms act, and prosecution underthe indian opium act was also pending ..... prove his charges against thecomplainant. it is in the light of these circumstances, that we have to decidewhether the appellant has proved that he acted in good faith or not. in dealingwith this question, we cannot overlook or ignore the probabilities on which theappellant relies, the surrounding circumstances to ..... of the court because it is likely to have been influenced bylegal advice. in our opinion, such a distrust of legal advice would be entirelyunjustified. 24. the other decision the learned judge has referred to is in the case ofsidheswar ganguly v. state of west bengal : 1958crilj273 . in that .....

Tag this Judgment!
Jul 27 1965 (SC)

M.G. Abrol Vs. Shantilal Chhotalal and Co.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1966SC197; [1966]1SCR284

..... for satisfying themselves that it is being exported under and in accordance with the licence issued by the proper authority. such a right of the customs authorities under the act is not seriously disputed for the respondent.24. what is really contended for the respondent and what has been held by the high court is that the decision given by the iron & steel ..... , to first refer to the various provisions relating to the powers and jurisdiction of the collector of customs with respect to the export of iron and steel for whose export there exists some prohibition or restriction.20. section (3) 1 of the imports & exports (control) act, 1947 (act. xviii of 1947) empowered the central government to make provision for prohibiting restricting or otherwise controlling ..... contrary to the prohibition or restriction imposed by the central government. section 178 of the act empowers any officer of customs to seize in any place in india either upon land or water, or within the indian customs waters, anything liable to confiscation under the act. it is clear therefore that the officers of customs have power to seize steel scrap if it be liable to ..... be confiscated, the respondents, would, in lieu of confiscation of the goods, pay the fine equivalent to the amount of the bank guarantee.44. section 183 of the act provides that whenever confiscation is authorised by the act the officer adjudging it would give the owner of the goods option to pay in lieu of confiscation such line as the officer thinks fit .....

Tag this Judgment!
Oct 18 1965 (HC)

Vasnatal Ranchhoddas Patel and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1967Bom138; (1966)68BOMLR223; 1967CriLJ715

..... of the enforcement directorate that the diamonds had not been seized in pursuance of the search warrant issued by the chief presidency magistrate, but that they had been seized under section 151 of the customs act 1962 read with the notification issued by the central government on 23rd may 1964 and that on 4th september they had been taken charge of by the ..... goods to the customs authorities by virtue of the provisions contained in section 180 of the sea customs act did not constitute a fresh seizure or a seizure within the meaning ..... the goods were seized. the supreme court held that a seizure under the act is one for which the authority to seize is conferred by the act and that in the context it could be referred to as a seizure under section 178, which corresponds to section 110 of the new customs act, 1962. the supreme court further held that the transfer of the possession of the ..... of the customs act was served upon the appellant and his statement was also recorded.(2) on the following day, 24th july, 1964, the safe was opened. it was found to contain seven packets of diamonds and currency notes of the value of rs. 24,055. all these articles were seized by the officers of the enforcement directorate. out of these seven packets .....

Tag this Judgment!
Apr 30 1965 (HC)

Seikh Md. Omer Vs. Collector of Customs

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1966Cal237

..... to consider the additional point, it is necessary for me to refer to clause (d) of section 111 and section 126 (corresponding to section 188 of the repealed sea customs act) of customs act, 1962 and sub-section (2) of section 3 of the imports and exports (control) act, which read as follows :--'(section 111 of the customs act). the following goods brought from a place outside india shall be liable to confiscation :--(a ..... by line no. 130 rotation no. 64/1781 relating to one 'brood mare' imported by you ex. s.s. chinkoa from u..k., the value of the goods under section 14 of customs act, 1962 has been declared as rs, 5,807.35 np. no proof or evidence in support of the correctness of the value declared has, however, been produced. the mare is ..... . the petitioner showed cause in writing, on march 1, 1965, in the following language:' 1. i state that the bill of entry, reply to summons under section 108 of the customs act 1962 and my letters in this connection may be taken into consideration as part of my reply.2. that the brood mare cannot be confiscated nor any action, can be taken ..... such a contention.24. since i hold that the mare 'jury maid' was not a pet animal to the petitioner, the animal does not fall within the exemption allowed in paragraph 4 of the public notice dated january 2, 1961 the petitioner, there fore, rendered himself liable to penal action under sections 111(d) and 112 of the customs act read with section 3 (2 .....

Tag this Judgment!
Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //