https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80228 The appeal was allowed based on the distinction between attempt and preparation in exporting Copra to Nepal. The court held that storing Copra in a godown did not constitute an attempt as there was no actual physical movement towards exportation. The goods were not in the course of movement towards Nepal, leading to the conclusion that the seizure was mere preparation, not an attempt. The court emphasized the need for actual physical movement with the intention to export to establish liability for penalties, ultimately setting aside the confiscation orders and penalties imposed. en-us Sun, 28 May 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Jun 2011 15:39:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80228 The appeal was allowed based on the distinction between attempt and preparation in exporting Copra to Nepal. The court held that storing Copra in a godown did not constitute an attempt as there was no actual physical movement towards exportation. The goods were not in the course of movement towards Nepal, leading to the conclusion that the seizure was mere preparation, not an attempt. The court emphasized the need for actual physical movement with the intention to export to establish liability for penalties, ultimately setting aside the confiscation orders and penalties imposed. Case-Laws Customs Sun, 28 May 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80228