Skip to content

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

Rohan Traders imported a consignment and, before any order for clearance under section 47 or for deposit in a warehouse was made, decided to abandon it. Which statement follows from section 23 of the Customs Act, 1962?

Rohan can relinquish title before the clearance or warehousing order and thereby avoid duty, but not where an offence appears to have been committed regarding the goods. The right is time-bound and subject to that proviso, so the first option is correct.

  1. ARohan may relinquish title and will not be liable to pay duty, provided no offence appears to have been committed in respect of the goodsCorrect
  2. BRohan may relinquish title at any time, even after the clearance order, and escape duty
  3. CRohan may relinquish title only with prior approval of the Central Government by notification
  4. DRohan may relinquish title even if an offence appears to have been committed, but must pay a penalty instead of duty

Explanation

Section 23(2) allows the owner to relinquish title at any time before the clearance order or warehousing order, and then he is not liable for duty. The proviso bars relinquishment for goods in respect of which an offence appears to have been committed. Option B ignores the time limit.

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.

More Remission of Duties questions