2015 (2) TMI 739 - HC - Customs

Benefit of Notification No.21 of 2002 dated 1st March,2002- Machines Used in road project - Sent for testing purpose to other project - Held that - The Tribunal found on a reading of the statements recorded under section 108 of the Customs Act, 1963, that the equipments and the machines were used by the assessee in a road project. For a brief period, they were sent to the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation and at the Metro rail site for testing only. There was no use for that project and which would disentitle the assessee from availing of any benefits under the subject Notification. That Notification envisaging usage in a road project and finding that the machines and equipments were indeed used in the road project and merely sent for testing purpose to the site of Delhi Metro Rail Corporation, that the Tribunal held in favour of the assessee. The findings of fact are consistent with the materials placed on record. They cannot be termed as perverse or vitiated by any error of law apparent on the face of the record either. The appeals are devoid of merit as they do not raise any substantial question of law. Decided against the appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Claim of benefit under Notification No.21 of 2002 for machines used in a road project.

Analysis:
The High Court of Bombay, in a judgment delivered by S. C. Dharmadhikari and N. W. Sambre, JJ., addressed the issue of the appellant's claim under Notification No.21 of 2002 for machines used in a road project. The Tribunal had previously disposed of two appeals concerning the assessee's compliance with the conditions of the notification, particularly condition No.40(b). The conditions required the machines or equipment to be used for projects like road construction. The Tribunal, after reviewing statements recorded under the Customs Act, found that the machines were indeed used in a road project, with a brief period of testing at the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation site. The Tribunal concluded that this temporary testing did not disentitle the assessee from benefiting under the notification. Consequently, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing their appeals through an order dated 5th February 2013.

Regarding the findings of fact, the High Court determined that they were consistent with the evidence on record and not tainted by perversity or legal errors. The Court held that the appeals lacked merit as they failed to raise any substantial legal questions. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed. The judgment reaffirmed the importance of adhering to the conditions specified in notifications and the significance of factual consistency in legal proceedings.