Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v Saleem

Officers of SARS detained and later seized clothing goods worth approximately R1.2 million from a retail shop operated by the respondent in Brakpan. The goods were marked as ‘Made in China’. The respondent and an alleged owner, Mr Chen, were unable to produce acceptable import documentation, books of account, or invoices identifying suppliers, purchasers, or proof of lawful importation and payment of customs duties, despite being given an opportunity to do so. SARS officers detained the goods under s 88(1)(a) of the Customs and Excise Act 91 of 1964 and later seized them under s 88(1)(c) on the basis that they were liable to forfeiture. The High Court declared the seizure unlawful and ordered return of the goods, holding that the officer’s suspicion was not reasonable. SARS appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was upheld with costs, including the costs of two counsel. The order of the High Court was set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the application with costs.

The case clarifies the threshold of ‘reasonable suspicion’ required for detention and seizure of goods under the Customs and Excise Act and affirms the importance of statutory record-keeping duties in customs enforcement. It confirms that SARS officials are not obliged to conduct further investigations beyond requiring documentation where traders fail to comply with ss 101 and 102, and it reinforces the application of administrative-law reasonableness to customs seizures.