High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAN
J.B. Trading Corporation - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
Case No : Writ Petition Nos. 3586 to 3588
Decided On : 16 June 1987
CUSTOMS ACT - IMPORT OF GOODS - CONFISCATION - IMPORT LICENCE OBTAINED BY FRAUD - GOODS LIABLE FOR CONFISCATION - IMPORTER CANNOT SUBSTITUTE ANOTHER PERSON TO FILE BILL OF ENTRY FOR CLEARANCE - WRIT PETITION DISMISSED.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner, J.B. Trading Corporation, sought to clear imported goods through bills of entry, claiming to be the importer. The goods were imported by M/s. Continental Silk House, which obtained an import license by fraud and misrepresentation. The license was canceled, and a First Information Report was lodged. The Customs Department issued a show cause notice to M/s. Continental Silk House proposing confiscation of the goods. The petitioner requested the Customs Department to allow it to file bills of entry for clearance, but the request was denied.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the petitioner could not claim to be the importer of the goods since the importation was complete on the date of arrival, and M/s. Continental Silk House was the importer at that time. The bills of entry filed by M/s. Jeena & Co. on behalf of M/s. Continental Silk House had not been canceled, and the imported goods were not abandoned. The court further held that the goods were liable for confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act since they were imported contrary to a prohibition imposed by law.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner could be considered an importer of the goods and claim the right to clear them through bills of entry. 2. Whether the goods were liable for confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The definition of 'importer' under Section 2(26) of the Customs Act includes any owner or any person holding himself out to be the importer at any time between the importation of goods and the time when they are cleared for home consumption. However, in this case, the importation was complete on the date of arrival, and M/s. Continental Silk House was the importer at that time. The bills of entry filed by M/s. Jeena & Co. on behalf of M/s. Continental Silk House had not been canceled, and the imported goods were not abandoned. Therefore, the petitioner could not claim to be the importer of the goods. 2. Section 111(d) of the Customs Act provides for the confiscation of goods imported contrary to any prohibition imposed by law. In this case, the import license was obtained by fraud and misrepresentation, which constituted a prohibition under law. Therefore, the goods were liable for confiscation.
Final Decision: The writ petitions were dismissed.
These petitions coming on for orders as to admission on this day upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof the order of the High Court and made herein and.............. and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. Habibullah Badsha for M/s D.A. Stewart and M.A. Kalam, Advocates for the petitioner and of Mr. P. Narasimhan, Central Govt. Standing Counsel for the respondents 1 to 6 and others Mr. Sriramulu Special Prosecutor for (SPE) Cases for the 4th respondent, and having stood over for consideration till this day the Court made the following order :
All these three writ petitions can be dealt with under a common order, since the writ petitioner in all the writ petitions is the same. The relief asked for in all the writ petitions is identical except that each of the petitions relates to different consignments.
2.The short facts are as follows :
One Messrs Continental Silk House, 47, 3rd Main Road, 4th Block, Rajaji Road, Bangalore, filed three bills of entry all dated 29th of September, 1986 for the clearance of 25 bales of mulberry silk in each case. The goods were imported by vessel 'VELENJI'. The vessel arrived on 27-9-1986. Messrs. Jeena & Co., the clearing agents of M/s. Continental Silk House filed these three bills of entry for the clearance of 25 bales of mulberry raw silk of China origin on behalf of M/s. Continental Silk House, Bangalore (the importers). The value of each of the consignments was declared as Rs. 3, 43, 651/-, Rs. 3, 45, 910/- and Rs. 3, 45, 792/- on the strength of the invoices raised by Messrs. Brightex (H.K.) Corporation in their favour. Both the importer and the Customs House Agent subscribed to a declaration as to the truth of the contents in the bills of entry as provided for under Section 41(2) of the Customs Act of 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the 'ACT'). On the strength of the bills of entry, the goods were inspected and the sampling was also done. Meanwhile, information was received by respondents 1 to 5 that the said importer was not in existence, and that the licence had been obtained by fraud and misrepresentation on the strength of fabricated documents. Therefore, the Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports issued a show cause notice to the said Importer and the same was not served since there was no such company in the address given. Consequently, the Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports conducted an enquiry and also cancelled the Licence given to the said Importer. Besides, a First Information Report was lodged and the C.B.I. was entrusted with the task of investigation. Accordingly the investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation was taken up and was being proceeded with. While the matter stood thus, a show cause notice was issued to the said M/s. Continental Silk House, as to why the goods imported should not be confiscated under the Act. The case is pending adjudication by the Collector of Customs. Meanwhile, the writ petitioner through its advocate Mr. L.V. Balani requested the Customs Department to allow the petitioner to file the bills of entry for clearance. The petitioner's clearing agents M/s. Srinivasa Mudaliar & Brothers filed one bill of entry. It was then noticed by the Customs Department that a bill of entry filed already by M/s. Jeena & Co., the clearing agents of M/s. Continental Silk House had not been processed yet. The other two bills of entry filed by the clearing agent of the writ petitioner were refused by the respondents since similar bills of entry had already been filed and the adjudication proceedings were in progress. Under these circumstances, the Department has sent a reply to Mr. L.V. Balani by letter dated 31-3-1987 under Registered post with acknowledgment due giving reasons for not noting the bills of entry filed by the petitioner.
3.It also requires to be noticed that by proceedings dated 18th of March 1987, the Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, after satisfying himself that the licenc
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.