Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + SC Customs - 1998 (7) TMI SC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1998 (7) TMI 91 - SC - Customs


  1. 1999 (9) TMI 86 - SC
  2. 2021 (12) TMI 90 - HC
  3. 2021 (5) TMI 327 - HC
  4. 2019 (5) TMI 1035 - HC
  5. 2018 (7) TMI 16 - HC
  6. 2015 (10) TMI 959 - HC
  7. 2013 (10) TMI 1005 - HC
  8. 2014 (9) TMI 144 - HC
  9. 2011 (3) TMI 1271 - HC
  10. 2005 (9) TMI 99 - HC
  11. 2001 (11) TMI 83 - HC
  12. 2024 (12) TMI 173 - AT
  13. 2024 (11) TMI 843 - AT
  14. 2024 (12) TMI 169 - AT
  15. 2024 (9) TMI 1326 - AT
  16. 2024 (9) TMI 946 - AT
  17. 2024 (10) TMI 17 - AT
  18. 2024 (9) TMI 942 - AT
  19. 2024 (9) TMI 941 - AT
  20. 2024 (9) TMI 185 - AT
  21. 2024 (8) TMI 676 - AT
  22. 2024 (10) TMI 334 - AT
  23. 2024 (8) TMI 1346 - AT
  24. 2024 (4) TMI 46 - AT
  25. 2024 (5) TMI 943 - AT
  26. 2024 (3) TMI 1187 - AT
  27. 2024 (5) TMI 1156 - AT
  28. 2024 (3) TMI 649 - AT
  29. 2024 (3) TMI 293 - AT
  30. 2024 (9) TMI 331 - AT
  31. 2024 (2) TMI 314 - AT
  32. 2024 (2) TMI 29 - AT
  33. 2024 (1) TMI 1220 - AT
  34. 2024 (1) TMI 1127 - AT
  35. 2024 (1) TMI 251 - AT
  36. 2023 (12) TMI 472 - AT
  37. 2023 (12) TMI 263 - AT
  38. 2023 (12) TMI 17 - AT
  39. 2023 (10) TMI 964 - AT
  40. 2023 (9) TMI 464 - AT
  41. 2023 (8) TMI 750 - AT
  42. 2023 (6) TMI 1094 - AT
  43. 2023 (6) TMI 317 - AT
  44. 2023 (2) TMI 1263 - AT
  45. 2022 (12) TMI 1339 - AT
  46. 2022 (9) TMI 1131 - AT
  47. 2022 (6) TMI 1140 - AT
  48. 2022 (5) TMI 745 - AT
  49. 2022 (3) TMI 515 - AT
  50. 2022 (2) TMI 153 - AT
  51. 2022 (2) TMI 22 - AT
  52. 2021 (11) TMI 126 - AT
  53. 2021 (7) TMI 1027 - AT
  54. 2020 (12) TMI 805 - AT
  55. 2020 (10) TMI 289 - AT
  56. 2020 (9) TMI 856 - AT
  57. 2020 (9) TMI 478 - AT
  58. 2020 (9) TMI 854 - AT
  59. 2020 (2) TMI 235 - AT
  60. 2019 (10) TMI 460 - AT
  61. 2019 (10) TMI 379 - AT
  62. 2019 (12) TMI 652 - AT
  63. 2019 (5) TMI 1730 - AT
  64. 2019 (2) TMI 1572 - AT
  65. 2019 (1) TMI 381 - AT
  66. 2019 (1) TMI 174 - AT
  67. 2019 (1) TMI 82 - AT
  68. 2018 (11) TMI 370 - AT
  69. 2018 (11) TMI 355 - AT
  70. 2018 (11) TMI 766 - AT
  71. 2018 (10) TMI 275 - AT
  72. 2018 (8) TMI 948 - AT
  73. 2018 (8) TMI 709 - AT
  74. 2018 (3) TMI 360 - AT
  75. 2017 (9) TMI 925 - AT
  76. 2017 (4) TMI 480 - AT
  77. 2017 (1) TMI 75 - AT
  78. 2016 (11) TMI 847 - AT
  79. 2016 (11) TMI 173 - AT
  80. 2016 (3) TMI 295 - AT
  81. 2016 (2) TMI 100 - AT
  82. 2015 (8) TMI 738 - AT
  83. 2015 (11) TMI 1399 - AT
  84. 2015 (7) TMI 179 - AT
  85. 2015 (10) TMI 2393 - AT
  86. 2015 (10) TMI 2083 - AT
  87. 2015 (10) TMI 280 - AT
  88. 2015 (11) TMI 1501 - AT
  89. 2015 (9) TMI 614 - AT
  90. 2015 (4) TMI 68 - AT
  91. 2015 (2) TMI 338 - AT
  92. 2014 (12) TMI 772 - AT
  93. 2015 (1) TMI 752 - AT
  94. 2014 (5) TMI 789 - AT
  95. 2014 (9) TMI 26 - AT
  96. 2014 (4) TMI 609 - AT
  97. 2014 (3) TMI 284 - AT
  98. 2013 (11) TMI 1398 - AT
  99. 2013 (5) TMI 814 - AT
  100. 2013 (10) TMI 1258 - AT
  101. 2014 (5) TMI 754 - AT
  102. 2013 (9) TMI 942 - AT
  103. 2013 (12) TMI 1195 - AT
  104. 2010 (7) TMI 590 - AT
  105. 2010 (5) TMI 733 - AT
  106. 2009 (1) TMI 630 - AT
  107. 2007 (1) TMI 16 - AT
  108. 2006 (8) TMI 81 - AT
  109. 2006 (7) TMI 384 - AT
  110. 2004 (10) TMI 114 - AT
  111. 2004 (9) TMI 488 - AT
  112. 2004 (8) TMI 206 - AT
  113. 2001 (7) TMI 189 - AT
  114. 2001 (5) TMI 301 - AT
  115. 1999 (12) TMI 696 - AT
  116. 2011 (3) TMI 1375 - Commission
  117. 2010 (9) TMI 778 - Commission
Issues Involved:

1. Misdeclaration of Goods
2. Eligibility for Exemption Notifications
3. Classification of Imported Goods
4. Actual User (Industrial) Status
5. Legality of Import under Open General Licence (OGL)
6. Confiscation and Penalty

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Misdeclaration of Goods:
The appellant was charged with misdeclaring the imported goods as "Cinematographic Colour Films (Unexposed) Positive" instead of "Colour films-jumbo rolls" to evade customs duty. The Collector initially held that the appellant provided a specific description of the goods, including their length and width, and classified them under the correct tariff heading. However, CEGAT found that the goods were misdeclared, as they were not ready for use on a projector or camera without further processing. The Supreme Court, however, concluded that the appellant did not misdeclare the goods since the description matched the classification under the relevant customs tariff heading.

2. Eligibility for Exemption Notifications:
The Collector denied the appellant's claim for exemptions under Notifications Nos. 52/86-Cus. and 50/88-C.E., as the goods were identified as jumbo rolls, not eligible for the claimed exemptions. CEGAT upheld this finding. The Supreme Court agreed that the appellant was not entitled to the exemptions claimed but clarified that the appellant's declaration was based on a belief and could not be considered a misdeclaration with dishonest intent.

3. Classification of Imported Goods:
The appellant classified the imported goods under Customs Tariff Heading 3702.41. The Collector and CEGAT held that the goods were not Cinematographic Films as they required slitting and perforation. The Supreme Court found this reasoning erroneous, explaining that the goods fell under the same heading, whether classified as Photographic or Cinematographic Films, as there was no separate heading for Cinematographic Films (Unexposed). Thus, the classification by the appellant was correct.

4. Actual User (Industrial) Status:
CEGAT held that the appellant was not an actual user (industrial) as it lacked an industrial licence under the IDR Act. The Supreme Court found this incorrect, noting that the appellant, a small-scale industrial unit, had a registration certificate from the Director of Industries, Uttar Pradesh. The IDR Act did not require a licence unless the industrial activity was carried out in a factory employing fifty or more workers, which was not the case for the appellant.

5. Legality of Import under Open General Licence (OGL):
CEGAT found the import illegal due to the lack of an industrial licence, thus not qualifying as an actual user (industrial). The Supreme Court disagreed, stating that the appellant met the definition of actual user (industrial) under the Import and Export Policy with its registration certificate, making the import under OGL lawful.

6. Confiscation and Penalty:
The Collector ordered the confiscation of the goods and imposed fines and penalties based on the findings of misdeclaration and unauthorized import. CEGAT upheld these orders. The Supreme Court, however, set aside the orders of confiscation, fine, and penalty, concluding that the appellant did not misdeclare the goods, was eligible to import under OGL, and did not act with dishonest intent.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, set aside the orders of confiscation, fine, and penalty, and held that the appellant did not misdeclare the goods, was entitled to import under OGL, and did not act with dishonest intent. The parties were ordered to bear their own costs.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates