Re-export of confiscated imported goods denied where import policy and labelling rules were breached and no statutory permission existed.

Imported goods found to be in breach of import policy and labelling requirements were liable to confiscation, and confiscated goods do not carry any automatic right of re-export merely because the importer claims title. In the absence of a statutory provision authorising re-export after confiscation, the request for re-export was rejected. The operative effect was that the order permitting re-export could not stand, and the confiscation consequence remained intact for goods imported in violation of import conditions.

---

---

Issues: Whether goods confiscated for violation of import policy and labelling requirements can be permitted to be re-exported.

Analysis: The goods were found to have been imported in breach of the applicable import policy and labelling provisions, and were liable to confiscation. Reliance was placed on the settled view that confiscated goods do not carry a right of re-export merely because the importer or exporter claims title to them. In the absence of any statutory provision permitting re-export in such circumstances, the plea for re-export was rejected.

Conclusion: The goods confiscated for contravention of import conditions could not be permitted to be re-exported.

Final Conclusion: The Revenue's challenge succeeded, and the order allowing re-export was set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: Confiscated imported goods, where import conditions have been violated and no enabling provision authorises re-export, cannot be re-exported as a matter of right.

---