<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1985 (3) TMI 150 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72910</link>
    <description>A bona fide transferee of a transferable import licence could not be denied clearance of goods already imported before the licence was suspended, even if the original licensee was later alleged to have obtained the licence by misrepresentation. The court noted that the licence had been transferred for value with notice to the licensing authority, the import had been completed before suspension took effect, and the transferee had no notice of any defect. The policy provision was treated as preserving action against the original exporter or licensee, not penalising a bona fide transferee. The refusal to clear the consignments was therefore unlawful, and clearance was directed on payment of customs duty and compliance with usual formalities.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 16:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=111189" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (3) TMI 150 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72910</link>
      <description>A bona fide transferee of a transferable import licence could not be denied clearance of goods already imported before the licence was suspended, even if the original licensee was later alleged to have obtained the licence by misrepresentation. The court noted that the licence had been transferred for value with notice to the licensing authority, the import had been completed before suspension took effect, and the transferee had no notice of any defect. The policy provision was treated as preserving action against the original exporter or licensee, not penalising a bona fide transferee. The refusal to clear the consignments was therefore unlawful, and clearance was directed on payment of customs duty and compliance with usual formalities.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72910</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>