TMI Blog1994 (3) TMI 400X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The seizure of the articles including the Close Up packings was made under the reasonable belief that they were liable to confiscation. 3. The Department of Customs moved an application before the learned ACMM. New Delhi with a prayer that they may be permitted to dispose of the tooth paste Close-Up. It was, inter-alia, pleaded that the Tooth Paste were not contraband goods but were used only for the concealing of smuggled goods. Further averments made in the application were that the Tooth Paste is a perishable item. which will deteriorate in value and utility by passage of time so the application for permission to dispose of the same. 4. M/S. Eastern Road Carriers Lid. moved an application to the Customs Department through their counsel for the release of 450 packings of Close-Up tooth paste to which a reply was sent by the Asstt. Collector, Customs (prev) from the Office of Collector of Customs, Customs House, New Delhi, slating therein that these packings were liable to confiscation under Section 119 of the Customs Act and thus, could not be released at that stage. Further information to the respondent was that the department has already moved the Court of Ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i Satish Aggarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Pradip Jain, learned counsel for the respondent and have also gone through the record. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the cartons of Close-Up tooth paste were used for concealing the smuggled goods and those were seized by the Customs Officer under Section 110 of the Act under reasonable believe that they were liable to confiscation. He has also submitted that once the goods are seized, as referred to above, it is only the appropriate authorities under the Act. who can Like proceedings for the confiscation of such goods and that the court has no jurisdiction to pass any order for handing over the same to any one. He has, thus, submitted that learned Acmm has committed illegality in passing the impugned order. He has further submitted that even the goods, subject matter of this petition, have not been produced before the learned Acmm, who was thus, not vested with any jurisdiction. According to him, the order passed by the learned Acmm is without jurisdiction and thus. prayer has been made that the same may be set aside and the department may be permitted to dispose of the same. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passing the order since the property had not been produced before the court. I am afraid, I can not agree with this submission. The production of property before the trial court does not mean that it should be produced physically. Learned counsel for the petitioner has admitted that the department is placing reliance upon the recovery of card board boxes of Close-Up tooth paste and it is a case property also. He has also submitted that department is relying upon this evidence to prove the offences of smuggling. It is only with this view that an application has been moved by the department for permission to dispose of the Close Up tooth paste. The claim of the department, however, has been that the department should be permitted to dispose of the same, may be by public auction, in- which the respondent can be permitted to participate so that if they are highest bidder, they may get the delivery of the same and in this way, their interests will also be safeguarded. I am afraid this argument can not be accepted. If there is an open auction, there is no concession to the respondent and every body is competent to participate in such an auction hut can be it said that it is for the benef ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the return-air tickets. In the instant case as already referred to, not only that the complaint has already been filed but the department itself wanted the permission of the court for disposal of the Close Up tooth paste. 13. The case of the respondent has been that they had taken the delivery of the tooth paste from M/s. Hindustan Lever Ltd., Calcutta and thus, the same was to be delivered to the consignee and they were concerned about its possession and they have established the need for immediate possession of the same so as to avoid its total loss and thus, irreparable loss and injury to the respondent. The delay not only would cause damage to the property, but may result in hardship to the respondent but the interests of the department could be safeguarded by the conditions, as imposed by the learned trial court. It could be different case where there is an offence under a particular special Act not attracting the criminal offence and a person authorised under the Special Act may seize the property for which the remedy would lie before the authority under the Special Act, but in the instant case, jurisdiction of the criminal court could not be ousted after the follo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
