1991 (5) TMI 169 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of import policy regarding coral.
2. Determination of the form of imported coral.
3. Application of redemption fine in case of non-compliance with import policy.

Issue 1: Interpretation of import policy regarding coral.
The appeal was brought by the Revenue against the Collector (Appeals) order allowing the respondents' appeal. The dispute arose over the import of coral declared as broken bits, seeking clearance under OGL Appendix 6 List 4 Sr. No. 7(A) of AM 84-85 Policy. The Deputy Collector held that the goods, though of non-jewellery quality, did not meet the requirement of being in powder form as specified in the policy. The Collector (Appeals) set aside the order citing the lack of expert opinion on the form of the imported goods. The appellant argued that the previous policy allowed import of broken bits as well as powder, but the current policy specified only powder form for coral. The Tribunal noted the distinction between the two policies and upheld the Deputy Collector's decision, emphasizing the need for compliance with the current policy's requirements.

Issue 2: Determination of the form of imported coral.
The respondents contended that the imported coral was not in chip form suitable for jewelry but rather granules or irregular broken bits, unsuitable for jewelry use. They argued that the goods were intended for Ayurvedic drug manufacturing, supported by supplying the goods to a registered small-scale unit. The Tribunal acknowledged the nature of the imported goods as broken pieces of non-jewellery quality, not in powder form as required by the policy. Despite upholding the confiscation order, the Tribunal reduced the redemption fine from Rs. 37,000 to Rs. 10,000, considering the intended use and quality of the goods.

Issue 3: Application of redemption fine in case of non-compliance with import policy.
While confirming the Deputy Collector's decision and setting aside the Collector (Appeals) order, the Tribunal reduced the redemption fine due to the nature of the imported goods and their utilization for Ayurvedic drug manufacturing. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of adherence to the import policy requirements, even when the imported goods were of non-jewellery quality and intended for specific industrial purposes. The decision aimed to balance enforcement with fairness, resulting in a reduced redemption fine and consequential relief for the respondents.