Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2015 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (8) TMI 1531 - HC - CustomsProceeding for forfeiture of property - restrictions on import of steel or steel utensils from Nepal - Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 - HELD THAT:- It is not very necessary to hold this question, because, the notice that Bharat Prasad and Shyam Babu have been detained in COFEPOSA for indulging in several schemes, that itself gives them jurisdiction. Further, in the notice under Section 6 of the “SAFEMA” itself, it is noticed that report in terms of Section 6 of the Act, having been received from the Income Tax Authorities, there was “reason to believe” that conditions existed for forfeiture of properties. It is well established that existence of materials is a condition precedent for forming a “reason to believe”, but, it is not open for the court to go into the question of sufficiency of materials - In the present case, if we see the notice, which gives the fact for “reason to believe”, that Bharat Prasad and Shyam Babu had been detained under COFEPOSA and that a report about unexplained stocks of steel utensils had been received from the Income Tax Department. There was neither any inquiry nor any report nor any material suggested that the properties which were sought to be forfeited were illegally acquired properties. The substantive restrictions on import of steel utensils was brought about in 19th May, 1969, and these purchases of properties, partition in the family in the year 1962, were all much much prior to that. In our view, applying the Wednesbury principle the decision of the Competent Authority and the Appellate Authority as well as the learned Single Judge, who has not gone into the question of denial at all, cannot be sustained. Petition allowed.
|