2014 (1) TMI 1477 - AT - Customs

Benefit of exemption under Notification No. 203/92-Cus., dated 19-5-1992 - Whether it was a requirement for the assessee to produce end use certificate to claim the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 203/92-Cus., dated 19-5-1992 in respect of the goods imported by them in June 1998 - Held that - one of the conditions attached to the notification was that, where the benefit of exemption was sought by a person other than the licensee, the benefit should be allowed against the licence and the certificate only if the transferability of the licence was endorsed thereon by the licensing authority. Obviously, the appellant is a person other than the licensee and the said condition was also applicable to them. Even at this stage, the appellant has not been able to show that the goods in question had been imported under an advance licence with its transferability endorsed by the licensing authority - The question whether any end use certificate was produced by the importer is, in our view, subsidiary to the fundamental condition - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Interpretation of exemption notification conditions regarding 'end use certificate' requirement for claiming benefit under Notification No. 203/92-Cus.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed by the assessee against an order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) following a remand order from the Bench's Final Order No. 565/2005. The primary issue in the earlier litigation was whether the assessee needed to produce an 'end use certificate' to avail the exemption under Notification No. 203/92-Cus for goods imported in June 1998. The appellant claimed to have imported the goods under a DEEC licence transferred from the original licensee. The exemption notification specified a condition that when the benefit of exemption was sought by someone other than the licensee, the transferability of the licence should be endorsed by the licensing authority. Since the appellant was not the original licensee, this condition applied to them. However, the appellant failed to demonstrate that the goods were imported under an advance licence with transferability endorsed by the licensing authority, thus not fulfilling the fundamental condition of the exemption notification for 'a person other than the licensee.'

The Tribunal concluded that the appellant did not meet the essential condition of transferability of the licence as required by the exemption notification. The presence of an 'end use certificate' was deemed subsidiary to this fundamental condition. Consequently, the appeal was deemed unsuccessful and dismissed by the Tribunal.

This judgment highlights the significance of complying with all conditions specified in exemption notifications for claiming benefits. It underscores the importance of meeting fundamental requirements, such as licence transferability, as mandated by the relevant regulations. The decision serves as a reminder for importers to meticulously adhere to the conditions outlined in exemption notifications to avoid potential disputes and ensure smooth import processes.