2017 (8) TMI 579 - HC - Customs

Benefit of N/N. dated 13th August 2008 - whether the CESTAT is right in law in allowing the benefit claimed by the Respondent? - Held that - the CESTAT has considered the merits of the matter after the verification of the documents and arrived the correct conclusion and further directing to allow the clearances of the goods imported is well within the power and based upon the record. There is no perversity and/or illegality in the order. The CESTAT has power to consider all the documents and record to give final finding on facts - decided against the Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 - Benefit claimed by the Respondent - Certificate of origin requirements under the Duty Free Tariff Preference Scheme for Least Developed Countries - Validity of the certificate of origin - Interpretation of exemption notification - Power of the CESTAT to consider documents and give final finding on facts.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to an appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962, challenging an order passed by the Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The main issue raised was whether the CESTAT was correct in allowing the benefit claimed by the Respondent based on the certificate of origin. The certificate of origin was crucial as it indicated the goods' consignment from a specific country and the compliance with the Duty Free Tariff Preference Scheme for Least Developed Countries.

The CESTAT considered the documents, particularly the certificate of origin, and noted that while the certificate was signed by "African Commodities House Ltd." instead of the exporter, the procedure allowed for retroactive issuance in certain cases. The Tribunal emphasized that minor discrepancies should not automatically invalidate the certificate if it corresponds to the imported product. Additionally, the certificate of origin needed to be issued by the government authorities designated by the exporting beneficiary country.

In citing the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a relevant case, the Tribunal highlighted the principle of strict interpretation of notifications granting exemptions, followed by a more liberal approach within the notification's particulars. Based on the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the CESTAT set aside the impugned order and directed the lower authorities to assess the bill of entry extending the benefit of the relevant notification, ultimately allowing the clearance of the imported goods.

Upon reviewing the contentions of the parties and the documents, the High Court agreed with the CESTAT's decision, finding no perversity or illegality in the order. The Court affirmed the Tribunal's power to consider all relevant documents and records to arrive at a final finding on the facts. Consequently, the Court concluded that there was no basis to interfere with the CESTAT's findings, disposing of the appeal and notice of motion without costs.