Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2008 (9) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2008 (9) TMI 756 - AT - Customs

Issues:
- Interpretation of EXIM policy provisions regarding re-importation of goods within a specified period.
- Applicability of Notification No. 94/1996-Cus. dated 16-12-96 to re-imported goods.
- Dispute over the time limit for re-importation of goods exported for an exhibition in the USA.

Analysis:
The case involved an appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the re-importation of a consignment of gold jewellery exported for an exhibition in the USA. The appellant re-imported the same consignment later and claimed exemption under Notification No. 94/1996-Cus. dated 16-12-96. The original authority denied the concession as the re-importation occurred beyond the prescribed 60-day period stipulated under the EXIM Policy for gems and jewellery.

The appellant argued that the provisions of the EXIM policy related to the DEEC scheme and import/export of gems and jewellery should not apply to their case as they did not import any material duty-free under such schemes. They contended that Notification No. 94/1996 is independent and not linked to the DEEC scheme, and since they re-imported the goods within the three-year limit specified in the Notification, they should be granted the exemption.

The Departmental Representative (DR) argued that the provision regarding temporary exportation of gems and jewellery under the Foreign Trade Policy should apply to all exports, not just those under specific schemes like DEEC.

The Tribunal, after considering the submissions, agreed with the appellant's argument. They held that the restriction on re-importation within six months pertained to DEEC schemes and should not be extended to exports and imports outside of those schemes. Since the condition of re-importation within three years of exportation was met, the Tribunal found no justification to deny the concession under Notification No. 94/1996. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and any consequential relief was granted as per the law.

This judgment clarifies the interpretation of EXIM policy provisions, the applicability of specific notifications to re-imported goods, and the time limits for re-importation of goods exported for exhibitions, providing guidance on the correct application of relevant regulations in such cases.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates