2005 (6) TMI 133 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of advance licences and Customs Notifications regarding the import of cardboard.
2. Confiscation of goods and imposition of penalties under the Customs Act.
3. Validity and binding nature of clarifications issued by the Joint Director General of Foreign Trade (Jt. DGFT).
4. Consistency of goods imported with the description in advance licences and relevant policy provisions.

Analysis:
1. The appeals were filed by the Revenue concerning the import of goods declared as "cardboard" under advance licences, claiming exemption under Customs Notifications No. 203/92 and No. 204/92. The Chemical Examiner and Chief Chemist provided conflicting reports on whether the goods were ivory board. The original authority found the goods as 'white cardboard', not allowed under the licences, leading to confiscation and penalties. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the order, which was challenged in subsequent appeals.

2. The Additional Central Govt. Standing Counsel argued that the goods were rightly confiscated based on the Jt. DGFT's clarification disallowing white cardboard and ivory board under the licences. The respondents contended that the clarification was not binding and relied on a Tribunal decision stating licensing authority cannot override licence terms. The Revenue emphasized the reports indicating the goods were white/dull-white board, not ivory.

3. The Tribunal examined the import descriptions, Bills of Entry, and reports. The Chief Chemist's findings of white/dull-white sheets/board were upheld. The Tribunal considered whether 'white', 'dull-white', and 'ivory' were similar shades and noted Jt. DGFT's clarification treating white cardboard and ivory board alike. The Tribunal concluded the clarification did not override licence terms or policy provisions, upholding the original authority's decision for confiscation.

4. The Tribunal found the imported cardboards, identified as white/dull-white, were deemed "white cardboard" under the licences, not permitted for import. The appeals were allowed, setting aside the Commissioner (Appeals) orders and reinstating the original authority's decisions. The judgment was pronounced on 8-6-2005.