Customs penalty and import control fiction upheld; importer without licence was not immune, and no question of law arose.

Import control provisions created a limited legal fiction treating the licencee as owner from the time of import until clearance, but not so as to extinguish the exporter's title where payment had not been received. The Tribunal held that earlier Supreme Court decisions on confiscation did not establish that goods imported in contravention of law could never be confiscated, nor that a proposed importer without the required licence before arrival was immune from penalty. On that basis, liability to penalty under the Customs Act was consistent with binding precedent, and no question of law arose for reference to the High Court. The request for reference was rightly refused.

---

---

Issues: Whether a question of law arose for reference on the applicability of penalty under the Customs Act to an importer who had cancelled the order and relinquished title to the goods before their import.

Analysis: The Tribunal held that the earlier Supreme Court decisions on confiscation of imported goods did not lay down that goods brought in contravention of the law could never be confiscated or that a proposed importer who had not obtained the required licence before arrival of the goods was immune from penalty. The legal fiction arising from the import control regime treated the licencee as owner from the time of import until clearance, but only to that limited extent and not so as to extinguish the exporter's title when payment had not been received. On that reasoning, the Tribunal's view that the applicant remained liable to penalty under the Customs Act was consistent with the binding precedent.

Conclusion: No question of law arose for reference to the High Court, and the request for reference was rightly refused.

---