9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Appeal against order-in-appeal for clearance of welding electrodes under OGL; Department's objection based on nickel alloy composition and specific licensing requirement; Confiscation and fine imposed; Appeal for re-export due to wrong supply; Goods described as welding electrodes in import documents; Claim for clearance under OGL by actual user. Analysis: The case involved an appeal against an order-in-appeal regarding the clearance of welding electrodes under Open General License (OGL). The appellants, manufacturers of engine valves, imported welding electrodes for use in manufacturing engine valves. The department objected to the clearance under OGL, citing the nickel alloy composition and specific licensing requirements under Sr. No. 547 of Appendix 3 Part A of Policy 85-88. The adjudication proceedings resulted in confiscation of goods and imposition of a fine. The appellants requested re-export, claiming the goods were wrongly supplied, and the Collector (Appeals) allowed re-export on payment of a fine. During the appeal, the appellants' advocate stated that the goods were not cleared for home consumption or re-export. They discovered the mismatch in chemical composition after receiving a telex message from the supplier. The advocate argued that the goods, described as welding electrodes, should be cleared under OGL as they were intended for actual use. The department contended that since the goods were nickel-based alloy rods, they fell under Sr. No. 547 and required a specific license. After considering both arguments, the judge found that the goods imported were welding electrodes in the form of alloy rods, meant for actual use by the importers. Despite being nickel-based, the evidence supported the claim for clearance under OGL. The judge also noted that the appellants were not interested in clearing the goods for home consumption and had requested re-export due to the mismatch in chemical composition. As a result, the judge set aside the lower authority's order and allowed the appellants to re-export the goods within 60 days. Failure to do so would result in treating the goods as abandoned and disposed of according to the law. The judgment emphasized the specific description of the goods as welding electrodes and the import for actual use by the appellants, supporting the clearance under OGL and the permission for re-export based on the circumstances of the case.
|
