2015 (6) TMI 534 - AT - Customs

Import of software for Seismic purposes - Denial of the benefit of Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. dated 1.3.2002 - importation of the identical goods by the assessee - Held that - Item imported by the appellant in this case is similar to the item imported in the case of Tullow India Operations Ltd. (2005 (10) TMI 502 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) i.e. IT software and also observed that in this case the item imported by the appellant is squarely covered by item No. (1) of Schedule 12 attached as per Sr. No. 214 to the Notification No. 21/2002-Cus dated 1.3.2002. Further, the appellant has produced a certificate from duly authorised person of Directorate General of Hydro Carbons, in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Govt. of India to the effect that imported goods are required for petroleum operations. In these circumstances, we hold that the appellant has complied with the condition of Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. dated 1.3.2002. Therefore, the appellant is entitled to avail the benefit of the said notification. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues involved:
Whether the appellant is entitled to avail the benefit of Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. dated 1.3.2002 Sr. No. 214.

Analysis:
The appellant imported software for Seismic purposes and claimed the benefit of Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. dated 1.3.2002 Sr. No. 214, which was denied by the lower authorities. The appellant argued that they fulfilled the conditions by producing a certificate from the Directorate General of Hydro Carbons, as required by the notification. They cited precedents where similar benefits were granted by the Hon'ble Apex Court in comparable cases. The issue was whether the appellant met the conditions for the exemption under the notification.

The Tribunal examined the notification's requirements and found that the appellant indeed fulfilled the conditions. The goods imported were covered by the specified list in the notification, and the appellant provided the necessary certificate from the Directorate General of Hydro Carbons. The Tribunal referred to previous judgments where the grant of essentiality certificate was crucial for availing the exemption under the notification. The appellant's compliance with the conditions was deemed satisfactory.

In a similar case involving the appellant, the Hon'ble Apex Court had emphasized the importance of the essentiality certificate and the renewal of licenses for obtaining the exemption benefits. The Court had interpreted exemption notifications liberally, especially when the eligibility criteria were met. The Tribunal noted that the appellant's situation aligned with the principles established in previous judgments, leading to the conclusion that the appellant was entitled to the benefit of the notification.

Ultimately, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal with consequential relief. The decision was based on the appellant's fulfillment of the conditions specified in the notification and consistent application of legal principles established in previous cases.