Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + SC Customs - 1976 (3) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1976 (3) TMI 55 - SC - CustomsWhether property in the goods had passed to the Cycle Company when the contract had been entered by the respondent with it, that is to say, prior to the arrival of the goods at Calcutta port for clearance? Held that:- We are dealing with an order of confiscation of certain goods imported under a licence granted to the respondent. It was never disputed that it was a valid licence. It was also not an Actual User licence. The respondent, therefore, could sell these imported goods to others. The whole matter, therefore, turned on the legal issue as to whether property had passed at the time the respondent had entered into the contract for the sale of the imported goods. Even the Customs Authority in its additional show cause notice made particular reference to Section 20 of the Sale of Goods Act and pointed out that "the ownership in the goods under consideration appears to have passed on to M/s. Bombay and Calcutta Cycle Company right from the time the sale contract was concluded". When, therefore, on the terms of the contract along with other relevant facts and circumstances which had to be looked into by the adjudicator for application of Section 20 of the Sale of Goods Act, he committed a manifest error of law apparent on the face of the order, the High Court's jurisdiction to interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution is clearly attracted. The submission of Mr. Sanghi is, therefore, without any force. The orders of confiscation of the goods and penalties imposed are invalid and the High Court was right in quashing the same by issuing the appropriate writs
|