https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50911 Import made in the name of a fictitious non-existing firm without an import-export code, in contravention of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act and the Customs Act, could not support a claim of ownership by the appellants. The documentary record did not establish them as shipper, importer, or owner, and their version was inconsistent with the bill of lading and other shipping documents. As they were not shown to be bona fide exporters, they could not invoke the re-export principle. The confiscation of the goods and the vesting of the auction sale proceeds in the Government were therefore upheld, and the appellants were not entitled to recover the proceeds. en-us Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Sep 2010 13:07:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50911 Import made in the name of a fictitious non-existing firm without an import-export code, in contravention of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act and the Customs Act, could not support a claim of ownership by the appellants. The documentary record did not establish them as shipper, importer, or owner, and their version was inconsistent with the bill of lading and other shipping documents. As they were not shown to be bona fide exporters, they could not invoke the re-export principle. The confiscation of the goods and the vesting of the auction sale proceeds in the Government were therefore upheld, and the appellants were not entitled to recover the proceeds. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50911