1979 (12) TMI 64

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... improperly exported, etc. - The following export goods shall be liable to confiscation :- ***** (d) any goods attempted to be exported or brought within the limits of any customs area for the purpose of being exported, contrary to any prohibition imposed by or under this Act or any other law for the time being in force; ***** (i) any dutiable or prohibited goods which do not correspond in any material particular with the entry made under this Act or in the case of baggage with the declaration made under S. 77 in respect thereof; ***** A consignment of frozen shrimps for export arrived at the Cochin Wharf. The same was examined by the officials of the Inspection Agency. The authorities suspected that the shrimps were not of th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... toms wharf accompanied by a certificate of export-worthiness, the authorities have power to cancel or to amend the certificate, once it is found on inspection at the wharf or any time subsequent to its issue, that the goods were not export-worthy and that the certificate issued had proceeded on misrepresentation or fraud or mix-conception of facts. In answer to our question whether there was such power or not, our attention was called to Ext. R1 instruction which, it was said, gave the requisite power. It is styled a 'circular'. Clause 2 of the circular reads as follows : "It has now been decided to amend para 3.2 and to add two new paras 3.3 and 9.3 as under: "3.2 In addition to the inspection at the premises mentioned in para 3.1 abo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ied that the strict requirements for exercise of the power have been satisfied or complied with. We are not satisfied that there was a detailed examination of the consignment as required by clause 3.3. of Ext. R1; nor was there anything to show that such detailed examination was after segregation of the goods and bad materials by the exporter as required by the clause. The Central Government Pleader contended before us that segregation was impossible and was out of question in the present case, as the whole lot was found unexportable. The premise was contested by counsel for the respondent; and in these proceedings, we would not be justified in assuming the facts in favour or the Central Government Pleader. As we are not satisfied that the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X