Customs Act, 1962 › Chapter VII — Clearance of imported goods and export goods

Section 48. Procedure in case of goods not cleared, warehoused, or transhipped within thirty days after unloading

Customs Act, 1962

Bare Act

Clearance of Imported goods: Section 48. Procedure in case of goods not cleared, warehoused, or transhipped within thirty days after unloading. — If any goods brought into India from a place outside India are not cleared for home consumption or warehoused or transhipped within thirty days from the date of the unloading thereof at a customs station or within such further time as the proper officer may allow or if the title to any imported goods is relinquished, such goods may, after notice to the importer and with the permission of the proper officer be sold by the person having the custody thereof:

Provided that -

(a) animals, perishable goods and hazardous goods, may, with the permission of the proper officer, be sold at any time;

(b) arms and ammunition may be sold at such time and place and in such manner as the Central Government may direct.

Explanation. — In this section,"arms" and"ammunition" have the meanings respectively assigned to them in the Arms Act, 1959 (54 of 1959).

Judgments on Section 48

  • Commissioner Of Customs -Commissioner… vs Home Designers And Fabricators Pvt Ltd — CESTAT, 26 Mar 2026. Where imported goods violate import policy or regulatory conditions but are not absolutely prohibited, confiscation under Section 111(d) may be upheld, but absolute confiscation is unsustainable and the adjudicating…
  • Sundaresh Bhatt vs Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And… — Supreme Court of India, 26 Aug 2022. Once the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) approves the Liquidator's decision to sell the movable/immovable assets of the corporate debtor in liquidation by adopting a particular mode of sale, there is no provision in the…
  • Hazel Mercantile Limited vs Kandla Customs — CESTAT, 7 Sep 2026. Where the department's test reports are inconclusive or bested by more specialized reports under the 'most akin' test, and the disputed goods are merely a species of the declared genus (NGL within Naphtha) covered by…
  • Jennex Granite Industries vs Chennai( Port Import) — CESTAT, 28 Nov 2025. Restricted goods become 'prohibited goods' under Section 111(d) once the required licence or condition is not complied with, so abandonment under Section 23(2) is unavailable to validate an otherwise invalid import,…
  • Kannur International Airport Ltd vs Cochin-Cus — CESTAT, 23 Sep 2025. Interest under Section 28AA of the Customs Act, 1962 is attracted only where the amount payable is 'duty' under Section 28, and therefore cannot be levied on cost recovery charges, which are not duty.
  • Mumbai Port Trust vs M/S. Shri Lakshmi Steels And Ors. Etc. — Supreme Court of India, 27 Jul 2017. Where delay in release of detained imported goods is attributable partly to the importer, the importer cannot claim exemption from demurrage and detention charges, the remedy for remission lying under Section 53 of the…
  • P.E.C. Limited vs Kandla Energy & Chemicals Ltd. And Anr. — Delhi High Court, 5 Oct 2016. Where imported goods are not cleared within thirty days, they can be sold only under Section 150 of the Customs Act, and a pledgee — standing in the owner's shoes — takes the sale proceeds last, after customs dues and…
  • M/S. Mumbai International Airport… vs The Union Of India, Through Secretary,… — Bombay High Court, 13 Oct 2014. A custodian appointed under section 45 of the Customs Act who voluntarily accepts custodianship and facility approvals subject to the Handling of Cargo in Customs Areas Regulations, 2009 is bound by Regulation 5(2), and…
  • Chairman, Board Of Trustees, C.P.T. vs M/S Arebee Star Maritime Agen.Pvt.L — Supreme Court of India, 5 Aug 2020. Once a Port Trust takes charge of goods and gives a receipt, liability for storage/demurrage falls on the importer, owner, consignee or their agent, and neither the passing of title nor endorsement of the bill of lading…