2012 (11) TMI 728 - AT - Central Excise

Export of goods re-import after rejected by the importer - limitation of one year - benefit of the Notification No. 52/03-Cus., dated 31-3-03 and to release the goods without payment of duty Held that - When the goods were allowed for export, that date should be construed as date of export and that is 19-6-09. It is undisputed fact that goods came back to India on 11-6-10. That is 8 days before expiry of one year from the date of loading of the goods to the ships - there is no reason to deny the benefit of notification in question to the appellant since reimport within one year of export is duty free - appeal is allowed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of the date of export for the purpose of computation of one year period.
2. Eligibility for exemption from duty under Notification No. 52/03-Cus.
3. Relevance of the date when goods were allowed to leave ICD in determining the reimportation timeline.
4. Consideration of the definition of "export" under Section 2(18) of the Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Interpretation of the date of export
The appellant contended that the date of export should be considered as the date when the goods were intended to leave India for export, which was on 19-6-09. The Customs authorities allowed export on this date, and the goods returned to India on 11-6-10, within one year from the date of export. The Tribunal agreed that the date of export should be construed as the date when the goods were allowed to leave, i.e., 19-6-09, and since the goods reentered India within one year, the benefit of the notification for duty exemption should apply.

Issue 2: Eligibility for exemption from duty
The appellant sought exemption from duty under Notification No. 52/03-Cus. for reimporting goods that were rejected by the foreign buyer within the one-year period from the date of export. The appellant argued that no mala fide intention was involved, and they had already suffered a significant loss. The Tribunal acknowledged that the appellant's situation warranted consideration under the notification, as reimporting within one year of export entitled them to duty-free import.

Issue 3: Relevance of the date of allowing goods to leave ICD
The Revenue argued that the relevant date for computing the one-year period should be when the goods reached India, which was beyond the stipulated one-year period. However, the Tribunal emphasized that the crucial date was when the goods were allowed for export, i.e., 19-6-09, and since the goods returned on 11-6-10, within one year, the claim for exemption from duty was valid.

Issue 4: Definition of "export" under the Customs Act
The Tribunal referred to Section 2(18) of the Customs Act, 1962, which defines export as the date when goods leave India to reach their destination abroad. Citing a judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras, the Tribunal reaffirmed that the date of export in this case was 19-6-09 when the goods were allowed to leave. This interpretation supported the appellant's eligibility for duty exemption upon reimportation within one year.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, emphasizing that the law should be interpreted to facilitate rather than hinder processes. The appellant was not required to pay duty for reimporting the goods rejected by the foreign buyer within the stipulated one-year period from the date of export.