9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (1) TMI 98 - AT - CustomsImport of areca nuts (betel nuts) against Duty Free Import Authorisations (DFIA) - whether eligible - Notification No. 98/2009-Cus. dated 11.09.2009 - Held that - it is pertinent to mention that in the case of Sandur Micro Circuits 2008 (8) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT , referred to in the above quoted para, it was held that a circular cannot take away the effect of notification statutorily issued. That position is in-controvertible. However, in the present case it is not any circular which is being interpreted but a Public Notice issued in exercise of power conferred under paragraph 2.4 of the Foreign Trade Policy and para 1.1 of the Handbook of Procedures in terms of which an amendment to the Handbook of Procedures has been notified. Thus, the said Public Notice has been issued statutorily; it is not some sort of clarificatory circular. Thus, the judgment of CESTAT in the case of Global Exim (2014 (8) TMI 358 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD) does not come to the rescue of the appellant. Clearance of the subject goods i.e. Betel Nut Splits (not fit for human consumption) under the submitted DFIAs as exemption sought thereunder is not admissible on the subject goods was rightly denied - Decided against the assessee.
Issues:
- Clearance of betel nut splits under Duty Free Import Authorisations (DFIAs) - Eligibility of betel nut imports under DFIAs as tanning agent - Applicability of Notifications and Public Notices in permitting betel nut imports - Interpretation of Public Notice dated 15.05.2012 regarding betel nut imports - Impact of judgments on restrictions in imports under license Analysis: 1. Clearance of Betel Nut Splits under DFIAs: The appeal was filed against the denial of clearance for betel nut splits under DFIAs. The primary adjudicating authority held that the exemption sought under DFIAs was not admissible for the subject goods. The appellant imported betel nut splits and sought clearance under seven DFIAs, claiming eligibility based on the export of finished leather. However, the authority upheld the denial, leading to the appeal. 2. Eligibility of Betel Nut Imports under DFIAs as Tanning Agent: The appellant argued that betel nuts should be permitted under DFIAs as a tanning agent for leather, citing amendments in SIONs and relevant notifications. The appellant referred to judgments emphasizing a broad nexus with exported goods and the illustrative nature of certain terms. However, the authorities maintained that betel nuts were not specifically mentioned in the SIONs for leather goods, disqualifying them for import under DFIAs. 3. Applicability of Notifications and Public Notices: The appellant contended that certain notifications and public notices allowed for the import of betel nuts under transferable DFIAs. The analysis of relevant notifications highlighted the prospective nature of the changes, indicating that the amendments did not impact the case at hand. The Public Notice dated 15.05.2012 specifically addressed the import conditions for betel nuts, emphasizing requirements for actual users and specific mentions in SIONs. 4. Interpretation of Public Notice dated 15.05.2012: The judgment emphasized the clear wording and statutory nature of the Public Notice dated 15.05.2012, which restricted the import of betel nuts under DFIAs to actual users or specific SION mentions. The absence of betel nuts in the relevant SIONs for leather goods reinforced the denial of clearance for the appellant, aligning with the legal provisions outlined in the Public Notice. 5. Impact of Judgments on Import Restrictions: The judgment addressed the applicability of judgments on import restrictions under licenses, emphasizing the statutory issuance of Public Notices and the limitations on interpreting circulars. The analysis clarified that the judgments cited by the appellant did not support their case, as the Public Notice dated 15.05.2012 was legally binding and not subject to misinterpretation or retrospective application. In conclusion, the appellate tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming the denial of clearance for betel nut splits under DFIAs based on the legal provisions, notifications, and public notices governing import eligibility criteria.
|
