9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Import of restricted goods without a valid license. 2. Confiscation of goods for violation of Customs Act. 3. Claim of ownership by a third party after confiscation. 4. Validity of appeal to reclaim confiscated goods. Analysis: Issue 1: Import of restricted goods without a valid license - Two consignments of Mulberry Raw Silk were imported into India without a valid specific import license, violating the Customs Act. - The goods were restricted and required a valid license for import, which the importers did not possess. - The importers, M/s Pretty Designs, obtained licenses by fraud, leading to the confiscation of the goods. Issue 2: Confiscation of goods for violation of Customs Act - The Commissioner of Customs, Calcutta, confiscated the goods for violating various provisions of the Customs Act in two separate instances. - In one case, the goods were confiscated absolutely, while in another, an option for redemption on payment of a fine was given to the importers. - Penalties were also imposed on the importers for the violations. Issue 3: Claim of ownership by a third party after confiscation - M/s Unisilk Ltd., a Hong Kong company, claimed ownership of the confiscated goods after the adjudication process was completed. - They argued that the notified party, M/s Pretty Designs, did not make payment, so they retained ownership rights. - However, the tribunal found that the claim was an attempt to circumvent the law after the goods had been rightfully confiscated. Issue 4: Validity of appeal to reclaim confiscated goods - The tribunal rejected the appeals filed by M/s Unisilk Ltd. as they appeared much later in the process after the goods were already confiscated. - The tribunal distinguished this case from previous judgments where re-export was allowed, emphasizing that the import in this case was contrary to the law. - The tribunal also dismissed the relevance of other tribunal decisions cited by the appellants, as they did not align with the circumstances of this case. In conclusion, the tribunal upheld the confiscation of the goods, rejecting the appeals filed by M/s Unisilk Ltd. The judgment emphasized that the import of restricted goods without a valid license was a violation of the law, and attempts to claim ownership post-confiscation were deemed as an effort to evade legal consequences.
|
