9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
The case involved the denial of the benefit of concessional rate of duty to the importer due to non-production of certificates of the country of origin at the time of clearance of goods. Summary: The appellants imported 'Oleo Pine Resin' and filed Bills of Entry for clearance, claiming the benefit of concessional duty under Customs Notification No. 165/95. However, they did not produce certificates of the country of origin at the time of clearance, resulting in the goods being cleared at the effective rate of duty. Subsequently, they produced the certificates and sought a refund of the differential duty, which was rejected by the authorities. The main issue was whether the substantive benefit of concessional duty could be denied based on the timing of producing the certificates of origin. Upon examination, it was found that the production of the country of origin certificates was a procedural requirement under the non-tariff Notification. The lower authorities denied the benefit solely on the ground of non-production of the certificates at the time of clearance. However, precedent cases were cited where the benefit of exemption notifications was allowed even when the certificates were produced after clearance. The Tribunal held that the subsequent production of certificates constituted substantial compliance with the relevant conditions, as established in previous judgments. Referring to a previous decision involving Customs Notification No. 84/97, where the benefit was granted based on the subsequent production of a duty-exemption certificate, the Tribunal concluded that non-production of certificates at the time of clearance did not invalidate the importer's substantive right to the benefit of exemption. In light of these precedents, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were allowed with consequential reliefs. The judgment was delivered by Member (J) P.G. Chacko, with the decision pronounced in open court.
|
