Supreme Court upheld confiscation as importer had violated export obligation

1. M/s. Olympia Exports, had an advance license, and imported and cleared five consignments of raw silk through the Kolkatta port free of duty, on condition that the imported goods after conversion had to be re-exported.
2. DRI held that the importe had fraudulently obtained advance licence and had sold the said imported silk in the open market without discharging the export obligation.
3. A show cause notice was issued. The importer did not appear before the authprity on summons sent to it.
4. The Commissioner held that the importer was guilty of misrepresentation of facts and falsification of documents, and the import was contrary to law and therefore the goods were liable for confiscation.
5. The Tribunal allowed the appeals solely basing its judgment so far as the question of re-export of goods is concerned.

On appeal, the Supreme Court held as under:

6. The result of the above discussion is that import of the consignments in question being contrary to law, the goods were liable to confiscation under Section 111 of the Customs Act. The order of confiscation of goods passed by the Commissioner of Customs is held to be in accordance with law.

7. The Tribunal has not considered the evidence against these persons which lead the Commissioner to impose the penalties.

8. Nothing has been said in the order to justify waiver of the penalties.

9. Therefore, that part of the order of the Tribunal also can not be sustained.

Case Reference - Commissioner Of Customs, ... vs M/S. Grand Prime Limited And Ors on 7 July, 2003

Supreme Court of India

Author: A Kumar

Bench: M.B. Shah, Arun Kumar

CASE NO. Appeal (civil) 4151-4157 of 2001