2017 (10) TMI 471 - AT - Customs

Benefit of N/N. 13/2010 dated 19.02.2010 - imports of broadcasting equipments - denial of benefit on the ground that imports of broadcasting equipments by the appellant did not satisfy some of the conditions prescribed in the notification - In particular it has been highlighted that they have failed to produce the certificate from Joint Director General of Organizing Committee of CWG 2010 specifically certifying the list of equipments proposed to be imported. Held that - it has been prescribed that the list of such equipments needs to be certified by the organizing committee of CWG 2010. From the circular issued by CBEC dated 13.08.2010 it is evident that there was lot of chaos as well as urgency in getting the goods cleared in time for the conduct of CWG 2010. Circular has accordingly related some of the procedure to be followed in Customs House so as to facilitate the quick clearance of such equipments - In any case, it is found that the equipments proposed to be imported by the appellant has been duly certified by the Director Engineering of Doordarshan which is a constituent of Prasar Bharti. It is nobody s case that such broadcasting equipments imported by the appellant has been mis-used or diverted for use other than in the CWG 2010 - further it is also on record, that all the imported equipments have also been re-exported duly. Benefit cannot be denied only for the reason that certificate as required under the notification has not been produced from the appropriate authorities - the failure to submit undertaking from Prasar Bharti to re-export the goods also loses its significance in view of the fact that the equipments have been re-exported. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Import of broadcasting equipments for Common Wealth Games 2010, Customs duty exemption eligibility, Compliance with notification conditions, Undertakings and certificates submission, Promissory estoppel application, Customs duty demand and penalty imposition.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Import of broadcasting equipments for Common Wealth Games 2010
The appellant imported broadcasting equipments for the Common Wealth Games 2010 and filed bills of entry, seeking customs duty exemption under notification no.13/2010 dated 19.02.2010, amended by notification no.84/2010-Cus dated 27.08.2010. The goods were required to be re-exported after the Games.

Issue 2: Compliance with notification conditions
The Customs department alleged non-compliance with notification conditions, leading to a show cause notice and subsequent denial of the exemption benefit. The main contention was that the appellant did not fulfill the requirement of producing a certificate from the Joint Director of the Organizing Committee of CWG 2010 and failed to submit the necessary undertakings.

Issue 3: Undertakings and certificates submission
The appellant argued that they faced difficulties in obtaining the required certificates initially, leading to the submission of self-signed undertakings. They later submitted undertakings from Prasar Bharti, which the Revenue denied. The appellant emphasized that the goods were re-exported after clearance.

Issue 4: Promissory estoppel application
The appellant invoked the doctrine of promissory estoppel, stating that after clearance and re-export of goods, the Department could not demand duty. They highlighted the amendments to the notification and the challenges faced in obtaining certificates.

Issue 5: Customs duty demand and penalty imposition
The Revenue contended that the appellant, as a sub-contractor of Prasar Bharti, did not meet the notification conditions, specifically regarding certificates and undertakings. However, the Tribunal found that the broadcasting equipments were certified by Doordarshan, a constituent of Prasar Bharti, and were re-exported as required, leading to the dismissal of the duty demand and penalty imposition.

In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeals based on the satisfactory compliance with the notification conditions, the re-export of goods, and the absence of misuse or diversion of the imported equipments. The decision emphasized the importance of fulfilling procedural requirements while considering the practical challenges faced during time-sensitive events like the Common Wealth Games 2010.