Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether export goods could be confiscated and penalised under the Customs Act, 1962 when shipping bills had been filed before the export prohibition, in the light of the transitional protection under the Foreign Trade Policy, 2009-14.
Analysis: The filing of the shipping bill constitutes the relevant stage of entry for export under Section 50 of the Customs Act, 1962. On the facts, the shipping bills had been presented before the notification prohibiting export was issued, and the goods had been stuffed, sealed and dispatched from the factory before that date. The subsequent prohibition was also subject to the transitional regime under para 1.5 of the Foreign Trade Policy, 2009-14. In these circumstances, the goods could not be treated as prohibited goods for the purpose of confiscation under Section 113(d) merely because they entered the customs area later, and the imposition of penalty under Section 114(i) could not survive.
Conclusion: Confiscation, redemption fine and penalty were not warranted; the appeals were entitled to succeed.
Final Conclusion: The impugned orders were set aside and relief was granted to the appellants.
Ratio Decidendi: For export goods, the legality of confiscation under Section 113(d) must be tested with reference to the stage of entry under Section 50 and the applicable transitional export policy, and goods presented for export before the prohibition cannot be confiscated merely because they reached the customs area later.