9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Interpretation of Import Policy regarding registration of contracts with the Textile Commissioner for import clearance under Open General Licence (OGL). Validity of importation of Nylon Yarn under OGL based on registration timing and compliance with Import Policy. Justification of imposition of redemption fine for unauthorized importation. Consideration of mala fide intention in delay of registration and imposition of penalty. Applicability of para 26 of Import Policy in determining the validity of import under OGL. Analysis: The appeal concerned the importation of Nylon Yarn under Open General Licence (OGL) and the dispute arose due to the timing of registration of the import contract with the Textile Commissioner. The Collector of Customs, Bombay, had confiscated the goods under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962, but allowed redemption on payment of a fine. The key issue was whether the import was unauthorized based on the registration timing and compliance with the Import Policy, specifically para 11 of Appendix 6. The appellant argued that the contract was registered before importation and presented to customs during clearance, fulfilling the necessary requirements. The appellant contended that the term "import" should be understood at the time of actual importation into India, not at the date of shipment, as per the definition under the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947. The appellant further contended that there was no mala fide intention in delaying the registration, supported by a letter from DGTD confirming registration was not necessary. The appellant cited previous judgments where imposition of fines and penalties was deemed unjustified in the absence of mala fides. The appellant emphasized that the Collector found no mala fide intention and argued against the imposition of redemption fine based on the accepted bona fides. On the other hand, the Respondent argued that the import contravened the provisions of the Imports and Exports Control Act, justifying the imposition of a redemption fine for unauthorized importation. The Respondent highlighted para 26 of the Import Policy, stating that registration must occur before the date of shipment to be considered valid under the Policy Book. The Respondent contended that since the registration was after the shipment date, the import under OGL was not valid, supporting the imposition of the redemption fine. In the judgment, the Tribunal considered the arguments from both sides and reviewed the Collector's finding of no mala fide intention on the part of the importer. The Tribunal emphasized that confiscation and imposition of fines should be evaluated based on the facts and circumstances of each case. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant's counsel that in the absence of mala fides and considering the bona fide conduct of the appellants, confiscation and imposition of the redemption fine were not warranted. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal based on the appellant's bona fide conduct and providing consequential relief. The Tribunal did not delve into other issues raised, as the appeal was allowed on the grounds of the appellants' conduct.
|
