9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (12) TMI 1688 - AT - CustomsEOU - Confiscation - import of second-hand tractor - it has been alleged that goods had been imported in violation of the licensing note (1)(ii)(d)(iv) in Chapter 87 of the ITC HSN appended to the Foreign Trade Policy - Held that - It is apparent from the licensing notes in Chapter 87 that the restrictions therein are intended for vehicles that are imported for use as such on the roads in India. The appellant is a unit that is engaged in the manufacture of tractors and is not a user of the said tractor except in relation to its manufacturing activity. It would therefore not be in violation of the licensing notes referred to in the impugned order - the confiscation of the tractor is without authority of law and is set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
Challenge to confiscation of imported second-hand tractor under Customs Act, 1962 based on violation of licensing note in Chapter 87 of ITC HSN. Analysis: The appellant, an Export Oriented Unit, contested the confiscation of a second-hand tractor imported from Germany, arguing that it was for the development of new models/parts and not for road use in India. The appellant claimed the tractor was manufactured by their facility in Germany and had not been sold or registered before import. The Tribunal noted that the licensing notes in Chapter 87 apply to vehicles for road use in India, not manufacturing units like the appellant. The Tribunal found no evidence contradicting the appellant's claim that the tractor was unused and sourced from the manufacturer. Consequently, the confiscation and penalty were set aside as unauthorized, and the appeal was allowed. Conclusion: The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, M/s. John Deere Equipment P. Ltd., setting aside the confiscation and penalty imposed on the imported second-hand tractor. The judgment clarified that the licensing notes in Chapter 87 did not apply to the appellant as a manufacturing unit, and the evidence supported the tractor being unused and directly sourced from the manufacturer. The decision highlighted the importance of considering the specific circumstances and purpose of importation when applying customs regulations, ultimately leading to the appeal being allowed.
|
