2007 (4) TMI 446 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of DGFT notification regarding import of marble slabs.
2. Validity of Public Notice allowing free import of marble slabs from SAARC countries.
3. Consistency between Public Notice and DGFT notification.
4. Request for stay on Commissioner (Appeals) order.

Issue 1: Interpretation of DGFT notification regarding import of marble slabs
The case involved an appeal by the Revenue regarding the import of marble slabs valued below the specified amount under a DGFT notification. The Revenue argued that the goods were not freely importable as per the notification and should be confiscated. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the order, citing a Public Notice from 1998 allowing free import of marble slabs from SAARC countries. The Revenue contended that the Public Notice was inconsistent with the DGFT notification issued in 2005, which set a specific value for free import.

Issue 2: Validity of Public Notice allowing free import of marble slabs from SAARC countries
The Revenue challenged the reliance on the Public Notice from 1998 by the Commissioner (Appeals), arguing that it was not applicable after the issuance of the DGFT notification in 2005. The Public Notice allowed free import of marble slabs from SAARC countries without specifying a minimum value, contrary to the later notification. The Revenue sought to establish that the Public Notice should not override the newer notification's provisions.

Issue 3: Consistency between Public Notice and DGFT notification
The Tribunal examined the consistency between the Public Notice and the DGFT notification. It was observed that the Public Notice made an exception for imports from SAARC countries, not imposing any value restrictions, unlike the notification. The Tribunal found that the Public Notice did not conflict with the current notification as it pertained specifically to imports from SAARC countries, maintaining the same exim code as described in the notification.

Issue 4: Request for stay on Commissioner (Appeals) order
The Revenue requested a stay on the Commissioner (Appeals) order, arguing that the Public Notice should not be considered valid post the issuance of the DGFT notification. However, the Tribunal rejected the stay petition, noting that the Public Notice's exception for imports from SAARC countries did not contradict the value restrictions imposed by the notification. Therefore, the operation of the Commissioner (Appeals) order was not stayed.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, emphasizing the distinction between the Public Notice and the DGFT notification, particularly regarding imports from SAARC countries and the specified value for free import of marble slabs.