Find a Lawyer

CUSTOM APPEAL NO. 1600/LB OF 2001, DECIDED ON 8TH MARCH, 2002. versus CUSTOM APPEAL NO. 1600/LB OF 2001, DECIDED ON 8TH MARCH, 2002.

Sections 17 and 156 (1) (8) were imported in violation of section 15 or section 16 of the Customs Act, 1969, for the custody and confiscation of goods, no benefit of doubt was available to the Department of the Bill of record. Since During the proceedings, the bill was introduced to prove the correct import of the confiscated forklifter so that besides the duty and taxes imposed, the levy of redemption penalty of Rs. ? It would be equivalent to endangering legitimate government revenue that the relevant record had been deleted and the bill of entry could not be confirmed, which would have led court officials to believe that this was an issue in which the benefit of the doubt. The suspicion that can be raised but neglecting the settlement is always in favor of the accused / the respondents and never the prosecution, on the basis that the prosecution was extended on the basis of the petitioner. If allowed in favor, the government's legitimate income would be jeopardized. Such a procedure was totally illegal and Without any foundation had to go to a benefit of the doubt in terms of appeal, the appellate tribunal to appeal a benefit of the doubt. And ordered the forklifter to be released to its legitimate owner without any conditions list of supreme court advocates from Utror lawyer