Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 1995 (12) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1995 (12) TMI 127 - AT - Customs

Issues:
1. Rejection of registration of contract under Project Import Regulations 1965.
2. Classification of imported empty Nitrogen gas cylinders.
3. Fulfillment of conditions for project import.
4. Interpretation of Heading No. 84.66 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.
5. Compliance with required documents for import.

Analysis:

1. The appeal pertains to the rejection of the registration of a contract under the Project Import Regulations 1965 concerning the importation of empty Nitrogen gas cylinders for expanding an existing gas plant. The Asstt. Collector of Customs and the Collector of Customs (Appeals) both denied the registration due to the appellant's failure to provide necessary documentation related to the industrial license and project details.

2. The appellant argued that the imported cylinders should be classified under Heading No. 84.66 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, as equipment. They referenced previous decisions to support their claim, emphasizing that the import was for expanding the plant's storing capacity for supplying Nitrogen gas to consumers.

3. The Tribunal examined the fulfillment of conditions for project import, noting that the industrial license was initially issued to a different entity but later endorsed to the appellant's subsidiary. The import license was in the name of another company under the appellant's group, leading to discrepancies in documentation submission.

4. Regarding the interpretation of Heading No. 84.66, the Tribunal differentiated between initial plant setup and expansion, concluding that expanding the storing capacity did not qualify as expanding the unit under the relevant classification. The lower authorities' findings were upheld due to the appellant's failure to address objections satisfactorily.

5. Despite the appellant's arguments about the purpose of the import and the nature of the cylinders, the Tribunal found no grounds to overturn the lower authorities' decisions. The appeal was rejected based on the lack of compliance with required documents and failure to meet the conditions stipulated for project import.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates