1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court rules in favor of petitioners in abandoned goods case under Customs Act, 1962, emphasizing ownership rights and fair trade practices.</h1> The High Court of Judicature at Bombay ruled in favor of the petitioners in a case involving ownership of abandoned goods and entitlement to re-export ... Re-export Issues: Ownership of goods in case of abandonment by importer, entitlement to re-export under Customs Act, 1962Ownership of Goods:The case involved a dispute regarding the ownership of goods under the Customs Act, 1962. The petitioners, exporters of electronic goods, consigned goods to an importer who abandoned them without payment. The respondents argued that ownership transferred to the importer upon consignment. However, the petitioners claimed ownership as the importer abandoned the goods due to financial issues. The court analyzed the situation and found that since the importer did not claim the goods or present import documents, ownership remained with the exporters. The court cited a Supreme Court ruling to support this stance, emphasizing that exporters can claim ownership and re-export if the importer abandons the goods unless fraud is proven.Entitlement to Re-export:The petitioners requested re-export of the goods after the importer expressed disinterest and financial incapacity to clear them. The respondents detained the goods, alleging undervaluation and conspiracy between the petitioners and the importer. The court examined the circumstances and concluded that the detention and refusal to allow re-export were arbitrary and illegal. The court directed the respondents to release the goods for re-export to the petitioners upon payment of legitimate dues, emphasizing the lack of evidence supporting the allegations of fraud or undervaluation. The judgment highlighted the importance of honoring ownership rights and the right to re-export under the Customs Act, 1962.Conclusion:The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, in a detailed analysis of the case, ruled in favor of the petitioners, affirming their ownership of the abandoned goods and entitlement to re-export under the Customs Act, 1962. The judgment emphasized the lack of evidence supporting fraud or undervaluation allegations and deemed the detention of goods by the respondents as arbitrary and illegal. The court's decision to allow re-export upon payment of dues underscored the importance of upholding ownership rights and fair trade practices in customs matters.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
