- (1.) In view of the undertaking given in paras 22 and 25 of the counter affidavit, the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is confined to one point, namely that seizure of his account books was not legal (grounds 6 to 8 of the petition). The notification relied upon by the respondents makes the provisions of Section 110 of the Customs Act (L 11 of 1962) applicable, Section 12 of the Central Salt and Excise (sic) Act on doubt permits the Central Government to apply the provisions not of the Customs Act 1962 but, the Sea Customs Act, 1878 ; but we find that by virtue of Section 8 of the General Clauses Act references to the Sea Customs Act may here be construed as references to the Customs Act Section 178 of the Sea Customs Act made provision for seizure of property; and this provision has been re-enacted with modification in Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 . Accordingly we see no merit in this petition which is therefore dismissed.;