https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43126 Clause 5(3)(ii) of the Imports (Control) Order, 1955 was treated as creating a limited legal fiction for customs-control purposes, not as transferring ownership of imported goods where the importer had not paid, had not taken delivery of the documents of title, and had abandoned the goods. On that basis, the exporter's title continued. The text also states that later cancellation of a valid import licence did not retrospectively make the import unlawful, and confiscation under Section 111(d) or Section 111(o) of the Customs Act, 1962 was not attracted on the facts described. en-us Tue, 21 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Dec 2025 16:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43126 Clause 5(3)(ii) of the Imports (Control) Order, 1955 was treated as creating a limited legal fiction for customs-control purposes, not as transferring ownership of imported goods where the importer had not paid, had not taken delivery of the documents of title, and had abandoned the goods. On that basis, the exporter's title continued. The text also states that later cancellation of a valid import licence did not retrospectively make the import unlawful, and confiscation under Section 111(d) or Section 111(o) of the Customs Act, 1962 was not attracted on the facts described. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 21 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43126