Relinquishment of warehoused goods cannot defeat customs duty once auction proceedings begin under Section 23(2).

Relinquishment of title to warehoused goods was not available once customs authorities had initiated auction proceedings, because that conduct could not be used to defeat liability for duty under Section 23(2) of the Customs Act. The goods had remained in the warehouse for an extended period, time extensions had already been granted, and no payment had been made. On those facts, the statutory conditions for remission were not satisfied, so the claim for relinquishment and remission was rejected and no relief was available.

---

---

Issues: Whether, after steps had been taken to auction the warehoused goods, the appellant could claim relinquishment of title and thereby avoid liability for customs duty under Section 23(2) of the Customs Act.

Analysis: The goods had remained in the warehouse for a long period, extensions of time had already been granted, and no payment had been made. Once the authorities had initiated action for auction of the goods, relinquishment of title was not available to defeat the duty liability. On those facts, the conditions for remission of duty were not satisfied.

Conclusion: The claim for relinquishment and remission under Section 23(2) of the Customs Act was rejected, and the appellant was not entitled to relief.

---