https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45971 Where a consignee abandoned imported goods, made no payment, and filed no bill of entry or other import documents, detention of the consignment on suspicion alone was not legally sustainable. The Court treated the bill of lading naming the consignee as insufficient, by itself, to show that title had passed; on the facts, ownership remained with the exporter. In the absence of proved fraud or conspiracy, the exporter was entitled to seek re-export, and release of the goods for re-export on payment of lawful dues was directed. en-us Mon, 16 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Jul 2010 09:56:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45971 Where a consignee abandoned imported goods, made no payment, and filed no bill of entry or other import documents, detention of the consignment on suspicion alone was not legally sustainable. The Court treated the bill of lading naming the consignee as insufficient, by itself, to show that title had passed; on the facts, ownership remained with the exporter. In the absence of proved fraud or conspiracy, the exporter was entitled to seek re-export, and release of the goods for re-export on payment of lawful dues was directed. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 16 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45971