ADAM SUGAR MILLS LTD., BAHAWALNAGAR versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, SALES TAX AND FEDERAL EXCISE, MULTAN
Sections 3, 9 and 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, Arr. 197, 201 and 210 obtain a search warrant in the factory premises without theft, it is reported that the registered person is involved in theft of Central Excise Duty and other taxes. Formed a raiding party that raided the premises of the registered individual and the factory and seized the record without obtaining a search warrant under section 18 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, Section 3 of the Central Excise Act 1944. And 9 were charged with violation. The required notice warrants were issued under R-210 of the Central Excise Rules 1944 and Section 18 of the Central Excise Act 1944, the raiding authorities obtained through Section 165, CRPC, conditional on the preparation of the statement. Gone. Based on the beliefs, which were also included in Section 163 of the Customs Act, 1969 and Section 40A of the Sales Act 1990, the requisites for conducting a search without a search warrant. All said the provisions of the law were compulsory and the requirements contained in it were not fulfilled and were not complied with. ? Be used against a registered person as no search warrant was obtained as required under section 18 of the Central Excise Act, 1944; it was illegal to make the required visit or visit by the raiding party, without any legal authority; and The issuance and subsequent proceedings of the showcase notice, including restraining orders, were also outlawed and illegal,
