2019 (11) TMI 569 - AT - Customs

Concessional rate of duty - determination of date of Import - time limitation - extension of re-export bond period - whether for the purpose of computing the period of 6 months or one year, the date of actual clearance/import of goods should be taken as date of import or the date on which the Bill of Entry was filed by the importer? - Benefit of N/N. 158/95-Cus., dated 14-11-1995 HELD THAT - The concessional rate of duty prescribed is 15% of the aggregate of the duties of Customs, which would be leviable, in case of goods which are re-exported within six months of the date of importation. In case, the goods which are re-exported after six months, but within one year of the date of Importation, the rate of duty chargeable would be 30% of the aggregate of the duties of Customs. Therefore, the eligibility for partial exemption is dependent on the period of retention by the importer - Though the goods were entered for export on 23-8-2007 as per shipping bill, the permission for export is extended only on 1-9-2007. As the goods could have been cleared on import only after paying Customs duty, the earliest such is 18-9-2006 and with depositing of 30% of the aggregate duties of Customs, the importer was eligible to retain the goods for one year. In determining of one year, the original authority and appellate authority seem to have gone by date of filing of bill of entry even though the notification is silent on that. The assumption cannot be accepted that since the only provision that refers to relevant date for import is in Section 15 but that is for the limited purpose of determining rate of duty or tariff valuation. For other purposes, the general understanding of importation should apply. Goods cease to be treated as imported once they are cleared for home consumption. The date on which that happens should apply for determination of relevant date when the notification does not prescribe relevant date - There is, therefore, no reason to deny them the benefit of duty exemption as goods have been re-exported within one year from the date of clearance. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Date of import for computing the period of re-export.
2. Applicability of duty concessions and eligibility for partial exemption.
3. Interpretation of relevant date for importation purposes.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed challenging the demand for differential customs duty and interest by the Customs Authority due to a delay in re-exporting imported goods. The appellant argued that the date of import should be considered as the date of actual import, not the date of filing the Bill of Entry. They sought a refund of the excess duty paid based on the Customs Act, 1962. The Customs Department contended that the Circular dated 3-6-1997 was not applicable to the relevant Notification No. 27/2002, dated 1-3-2002.

2. The Customs Act, 1962, specifies that the rate of duty applicable to imported goods is determined based on the date of presenting the Bill of Entry for home consumption. The case law cited emphasized that the taxable event occurs when goods reach the Customs barriers and the Bill of Entry is filed. The issue revolved around whether the date of actual clearance or the date of filing the Bill of Entry should be considered as the date of import for re-export purposes under the relevant Notification.

3. The Tribunal held that the date of import should be determined based on when the goods are cleared for home consumption, not the date of filing the Bill of Entry. The eligibility for duty concessions and partial exemption was dependent on the period of retention by the importer. Since the goods were re-exported within one year from the date of clearance, the appellant was entitled to the benefit of duty exemption. The appeal was allowed, providing consequential relief to the appellant.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the legal issues, arguments presented by both parties, relevant legal provisions, and the Tribunal's interpretation and decision on each issue involved in the case.