1996 (4) TMI 208 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Denial of assessment under Project Import and confiscation of imported goods.
2. Discrepancy in the description of imported goods.
3. Interpretation of terms "Blower" and "Compressor" in relation to the imported machinery.
4. Justification for refusal to assess under Project Import and confiscation of goods.

Analysis:
The appeal challenged the order of the Additional Collector denying assessment under Project Import and ordering the assessment of Twin Lobe Compressors with accessories on merit, leading to the confiscation of the goods under Customs Act, 1962. The grounds for denial included the assertion that the imported goods were parts of full machinery, not covered under the import license, as well as discrepancies in the packing list description. The appellant argued that the goods were as per the license description, supported by evidence from the supplier, users, and technical literature. The appellant contended that the terms "Blower" and "Compressor" were interchangeable, especially with technological advancements eliminating the distinction based on artificial cooling requirements. The Tribunal found that the imported goods matched the license description, considering the interchangeable nature of terms and technological advancements, leading to the reversal of the confiscation order. The Tribunal also noted the lower authority's failure to address the value utilization aspect of the license. Consequently, the appeal succeeded, directing the lower authority to grant Project Import assessment and setting aside the confiscation order with consequential relief.