https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75206 The court held that both the custodian (MSIL) and the Customs Authorities are jointly and severally liable for the destruction of imported goods. It rejected the argument of no privity of contract between MSIL and the importer/insurer, emphasizing statutory obligations under the Customs Act. The court clarified that the limitation of liability set by the custodian and Customs Authorities does not bind the importer/insurer. Affirming joint liability, the court dismissed revision petitions, modifying decrees to hold all defendants jointly and severally liable with interest, while directing each party to bear their own costs. en-us Mon, 09 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75206 The court held that both the custodian (MSIL) and the Customs Authorities are jointly and severally liable for the destruction of imported goods. It rejected the argument of no privity of contract between MSIL and the importer/insurer, emphasizing statutory obligations under the Customs Act. The court clarified that the limitation of liability set by the custodian and Customs Authorities does not bind the importer/insurer. Affirming joint liability, the court dismissed revision petitions, modifying decrees to hold all defendants jointly and severally liable with interest, while directing each party to bear their own costs. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 09 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75206