Case Law Details
Czarnikow Group Limited Vs Senior Intelligence Officer (Madras High Court)
Facts- The issue to be decided in the present matter is thus whether the ownership of the asset vests in the petitioner or RS, which in turn, would determine, as a consequence, whether the NCLT is the appropriate forum to adjudicate the petitioner’s prayers, including for re-export, and the prayer of R5 for auction of the asset.
Conclusion-With regard to maintainability in favour of the petitioner it is held that the contract at clause 20 thereof, confirms the position that title to the goods would not pass until the buyer, i.e., R5 has made payment for the entirety of the goods. In my considered view, the petitioner thus assumes the status of an unpaid seller who continues to hold title/ownership to the asset imported.
With regard to re-export, it is held that the petitioner would bring to my notice a representation filed before the Customs Authorities as well as DRI seeking permission to re-export on the ground that the asset stands secured in the customs frontier and has not yet entered the domestic market. Let this aspect be verified by the customs as also the question of whether such goods are entitled to the benefit of the AA Scheme.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
