1999 (7) TMI 277 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
- Interpretation of Export and Import Policy 1992-97 regarding the import of a passenger car by a foreign national of Indian origin for permanent settlement in India.
- Determination of whether the car was used by the importer for more than one year prior to its import.
- Consideration of the registration status of the car in the name of the importer or his son.

Analysis:
1. The appellant appealed against an order-in-original by the Collector of Customs, New Delhi, confiscating a car imported by the appellant and imposing a redemption fine and penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act. The appellant, a British Passport holder, returned to India for permanent settlement and brought a 1991 model car. The dispute arose as the car was not registered in his name one year before his return to India, a requirement under the Export and Import Policy 1992-97 for the import of a passenger car by foreign nationals of Indian origin for permanent settlement.

2. The appellant's counsel argued that the car was indeed used by the appellant for over a year before import, despite being initially registered in the name of his son and later transferred to the appellant's name. The son provided an affidavit confirming the appellant's exclusive use of the car since its purchase. The appellant relied on invoices and registration documents to support his claim.

3. The Revenue contended that the car's registration in the son's name until shortly before import disqualified it from meeting the one-year usage requirement. However, the appellant presented evidence showing his ownership and use of the car, including invoices and the son's affidavit. The Tribunal noted that the Export and Import Policy focused on the importer's usage rather than registration details.

4. After reviewing the facts and submissions, the Tribunal found that the appellant, as a foreign national of Indian origin returning for permanent settlement, satisfied the one-year usage condition for importing a passenger car. The documentary evidence, including invoices and the son's affidavit, supported the appellant's claim that the car was in his use for over a year before import. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant.