9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Interpretation of Notification No. 163/65-Cus. regarding customs duty exemption for imported goods. 2. Applicability of Section 65 of the Customs Act, 1962 in relation to warehousing of goods. 3. Distinction between goods imported by post parcel and those imported by ship. 4. Legal provisions governing warehousing of goods imported by post under Sections 82 to 84 of the Customs Act. 5. Exemption of customs duty for ocean-going vessels manufactured in warehouse under Notification No. 163-Cus., dated 16-10-1965. Analysis: 1. The appellants imported Deck Machinery for their ship and claimed clearance without payment of customs duty under Notification No. 163/65-Cus. The dispute arose when some items were sent separately via post parcel, and the Custom House charged duty on those goods. The appellants sought a refund, which was rejected, leading to this appeal. 2. The appellants argued that the goods were required for manufacturing ocean-going vessels in a warehouse under Section 65 of the Customs Act. They contended that the items sent by post parcel should also be exempt from duty under the same Notification as the main equipments imported by ship. However, the Custom House did not grant this exemption, leading to the dispute. 3. The respondent contended that goods imported by post parcel cannot be warehoused under Chapter XI of the Act, as specific provisions under Sections 82 to 84 govern goods imported by post. These sections do not provide for warehousing of such goods, unlike goods imported by ship, which require filing a bill of entry for warehousing. 4. The Tribunal acknowledged the legal position outlined by the respondent regarding the warehousing of goods imported by post. Sections 82 to 84 of the Customs Act deal with goods imported via post, and no provision exists for warehousing such goods. The Central Board of Excise and Customs is empowered to regulate the entry of goods imported by post, but warehousing is not included in these provisions. 5. Regarding the exemption under Notification No. 163-Cus., dated 16-10-1965, the Tribunal clarified that the exemption applies to ocean-going vessels manufactured in a warehouse under Section 65 of the Act. It does not extend to imported parts or accessories, as claimed by the appellants. The Tribunal found no legal basis for exempting parts and accessories used in vessel manufacturing under this Notification. 6. Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, concluding that there was no merit in the appellants' argument. The exemption under the Notification was limited to ocean-going vessels manufactured in a warehouse under Section 65 of the Act, and imported parts or accessories were not covered by this exemption. The appeal was therefore rejected.
|
