9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Import of spares of earth moving machinery without actual user license under para 75 of the Handbook of Procedure. Analysis: The case involved the import of 13 consignments of spares of earth moving machinery valued around Rs. 38 lakhs by the appellants without the required actual user license under para 75 of the Handbook of Procedure. The impugned order imposed a penalty on the appellants for this violation. The appellants argued that the Import Policy for the relevant period did not restrict the import of spares for capital goods to actual users only. They contended that para 23 of the Import Policy allowed any person, whether an actual user or not, to import spares for capital goods. The appellants emphasized that the Handbook of Procedure could not alter the provisions of the Import Policy and that any amendment to the policy must be made through a Gazette notification as per para 3 of the Import Policy. The counsel for the appellant also highlighted previous decisions by the Supreme Court and the Tribunal, emphasizing that the requirement of a license or restriction should be determined by the Import Policy, not the Handbook of Procedure. They argued that restrictions, if any, must be explicitly stated in the Import Policy and supported by Gazette notifications. After considering the submissions and examining the legal provisions, the Tribunal found that the Import Policy did not require an actual user license for the import of spares for capital goods during the relevant period. The Tribunal emphasized that restrictions should be based on the Import Policy and supported by Gazette notifications, which was not the case in this situation. Therefore, the Tribunal held that the imports were not in violation of the Export & Import Law, and the penalty imposed on the appellants was unjustified. The penalty was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellants.
|
