Skip to content

CMA Final · Indirect Tax Laws and Practice · Remission of Duties

Goods valued at ₹8,00,000 imported by Kaveri Traders were found missing from the port yard before clearance for home consumption. Investigation shows the shortage resulted from pilferage by yard staff. Which statement follows from section 23(1) of the Customs Act, 1962?

Remission under section 23(1) is not available. The provision allows remission for goods lost or destroyed before clearance for home consumption, but expressly excludes loss resulting from pilferage, so duty remission cannot be claimed for goods pilfered from the yard.

  1. ARemission is available because the goods were lost before clearance
  2. BRemission under section 23(1) is not available because loss by pilferage is excludedCorrect
  3. CRemission is available only for 50% of the duty
  4. DRemission is available if the importer relinquishes title after the loss

Explanation

Section 23(1) covers goods lost 'otherwise than as a result of pilferage' or destroyed before clearance. As the loss is by pilferage, the remission provision does not apply. Option A ignores the pilferage exclusion; no partial remission is prescribed.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Remission of Duties shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Remission of DutiesFree diagnostic mock

More Remission of Duties questions