Find a Lawyer

AMJAD ATTA MUHAMMAD versus DEPUTY DIRECTOR, CUSTOMS

The applicant is a Customs Clearing Agent for the seizure of Articles 156, 168 and 181 of the Customs Act 1969, which was challenged by the Customs Intelligence and Investigation Officer on the basis of the seizure of three cars on this basis. The vehicles were seized by Collector Customs, but were not legally reclaimed after being released after a small fine, which was initially raised by the Customs Intelligence Department alleging that only the importer of the car was in possession of the cars. And the applicant who was the customs clearing agent to challenge D because he was not able to challenge it. Section 168 (2) provides that the seized goods were compensated for the return of the person who was seized; the seized vehicles were seized from the possession of the applicant; he had a luxury stand to seize the vehicles, Was the customs clearing agent and not the importer. criminal advocate from Mithi lawyer