TaxTMI Login
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%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether confiscation of the television under the Customs Act, 1962 was sustainable when the goods had been legally imported and the appellant asserted that the transaction was by mortgage and not by sale. (ii) Whether the confiscation of the video cassette recorder and the penalty imposed under the Customs Act, 1962 were sustainable when the baggage receipt was found to be forged and the appellant claimed absence of mens rea.
Issue (i): Whether confiscation of the television under the Customs Act, 1962 was sustainable when the goods had been legally imported and the appellant asserted that the transaction was by mortgage and not by sale.
Analysis: The television had been imported as baggage and cleared on payment of duty, so its legal import was established. The finding of contravention could not stand where the appellant's specific plea was that the article was obtained by mortgage and not by sale. A mortgage transaction was not shown to be prohibited under the applicable import control restrictions, and the confiscation order had proceeded without properly considering that defence.
Conclusion: The confiscation of the television was unsustainable and the appellant was entitled to its return.
Issue (ii): Whether the confiscation of the video cassette recorder and the penalty imposed under the Customs Act, 1962 were sustainable when the baggage receipt was found to be forged and the appellant claimed absence of mens rea.
Analysis: The baggage receipt covering the VCR was found to be forged on verification, and the appellant did not adduce material to displace that finding. The article was therefore treated as not having been legally imported. However, the appellant was not shown to be a habitual dealer, and the circumstances did not disclose the requisite mens rea for penal action. In those circumstances, confiscation was not wholly avoided, but redemption on payment of duty and redemption fine was considered appropriate, while penalty was not justified.
Conclusion: The VCR was liable to redemption on payment of redemption fine, and the penalty was not sustainable.
Final Conclusion: Relief was granted to the appellant by setting aside confiscation of the television, permitting redemption of the VCR on payment of redemption fine, and removing the penalty.
Ratio Decidendi: Where legally imported goods are acquired by mortgage rather than sale, and no statutory prohibition against such transfer is shown, confiscation cannot be sustained; where a contravention is established but the facts do not disclose mens rea, redemption may be allowed and penalty may be set aside.
TaxTMI 
