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 import of meat without a sanitary import permit was liable to confiscation and penalty notwithstanding the subsequent trade notice, and whether such goods could be treated as smuggled goods.
Analysis: The import restriction had been notified in the Gazette of India under Section 3A of the Live-stock Importation Act, 1898 and was in public domain well before the consignments were imported. The trade notice relied upon by the appellants merely referred to the existing legal position and did not create the restriction. Since the imports were made without the mandatory permit, the goods were imported in violation of law. On that basis, the goods were treated as smuggled goods within Section 2(39) of the Customs Act, 1962 and were liable to confiscation, with connected penalty consequences.
Conclusion: The challenge failed. The goods were rightly treated as restricted and smuggled goods, and confiscation and penalty were sustained.