9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Denial of benefit of exemption under Notification No. 49 dated March 1, 1978 for imported measuring instrument and probes. Analysis: The petitioners imported a universal measuring instrument along with a set of probes in June 1982 and claimed exemption under Notification No. 49. However, the Customs rejected their claim, stating that the special probes were not imported along with the measuring instrument as required by Item 9 of the Notification. The refund application was rejected by the Assistant Collector of Customs, and the Appeal to the Collector of Customs was also dismissed. The Collector of Customs concluded that all parameters mentioned in Item 9 needed to be fulfilled, including the import of special probes. The petitioners filed a Writ Petition challenging these decisions. The counsel for the petitioners argued that the machine should be capable of measuring any listed parameter with the help of accessories, and the presence of special probes was not necessary. On the other hand, the respondents contended that without special probes, all parameters under Item 9 could not be fulfilled, thus denying the benefit of the Notification. The High Court found merit in the petitioners' argument, stating that if the measuring instrument along with the imported probes could measure threads, both internal and external, even without special probes, the conditions of the Notification were met. The Court emphasized that it is the machine's design and capacity for measurement that matter, not the presence of special accessories. Referring to a judgment by CEGAT in a similar case, the High Court approved the ratio of the judgment. Consequently, the impugned Orders were set aside, and the matter was remitted back to the Assistant Collector of Customs for verification of the petitioners' claim for refund. The Court disposed of the Writ Petition with no order as to costs.
|
