9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (7) TMI 200X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... warranty coverage or after sale service to their customers. The Appraising group completed the assessment on the basis of the declaration but it was pointed out at that time, that the said goods could not be used in manufacture of vehicles. The appellants stated that identical bearings were used in manufacture of vehicles, and also contended that it was not the stipulation in the licence that spares of only such items which were imported and used as original components in Motor vehicles could alone be imported. The goods were permitted clearance under provisional assessment and on execution of ITC bond. 2.2 Subsequently however, the Customs authorities received information that certain importers were importing banned type of ball and roller bearings as warranty spares against licences issued in that regard, and that the appellants had also imported such items under the licence, and had either allowed various dealers to utilise them or had sold them to traders in the market. Information was also received that the ball bearings so imported had multifarious uses. Further enquiry revealed that out of the eight consignments as aforementioned, imported by the appellants, three had bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... worked out a net of dealers and part jobbers, who would supply the spares and that the Associated Auto Spares Parts (P) Ltd. were their authorised jobbers. They denied the allegation of having sold the licence, and pleaded that the licensing authority had also served them with a show cause notice alleging sale of licence, but had subsequently dropped the same. 2.5 The adjudication proceedings were thereafter conducted and the impugned order was passed. 3.1 Mr. V.S. Nankani, the ld. advocate for the appellants, while initiating his submissions on the appeal, has declared that out of the several contentions raised as grounds in appeal, he is advancing his submissions only on one of them and is not pressing any other ground. He has pleaded that the only issue for determination here, which he is pressing for appropriate determination is, Whether the import of 8 consignments of ball bearing is valid against the licence produced, which is issued in terms of Para 59 of the Policy Book AM 82-83. The ld. advocate has submitted that the licence is issued during the Policy period AM 82-83, and it specifically mentions to have been issued in terms of para 59 of AM. 83 Policy Book w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Book are taken as independent of Paras 57 and 58, the words only such of the spares makes it fairly clear that spares of only such of the items which were imported and used as original components, could stand covered under the licence. Referring to the provisions in the Policy Books AM 82-83 and AM 83-84, the ld. SDR has submitted that the ball bearings were otherwise non-permissible items and as such the concession given should be strictly construed and flouting the provisions could not be encouraged. As regards the approach of the licensing authority, the ld. SDR has submitted that the said authority was also not convinced of the bona fide and have only given benefit of doubt. 5. Considering the submissions made, there is no dispute about the identity of goods imported. There is also no dispute, that the ball bearings otherwise figure under the category of non-permissible spares and but for the subject licence, the appellants could not have imported them, except to the extent as permissible vide Para 58 of the Policy Book AM 83. The appellants have also accepted that the ball bearings used as original components, were not the imported ones. Their contention however is that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t be overlooked as redundant. 6.4 The only inescapable conclusion that can be drawn, therefore, is that the provisions are not intended to permit import of all or any type of spares and the words only such spares shall be permitted as were/are used by them as components has to be read as permitting import of spares of such imported items which have been used initially as component/equipment. Thus if and only if, the item used as original equipment/component is also an imported item, the import of such an item as spares, is made permissible. If the intention was otherwise, insertion of the condition was absolutely unnecessary, and the phraseology would have been either different or the qualifying condition would not have been inserted. 6.5 Post importation condition also ensures that the imported items should go only as replacements and makes explicit the intention of the policy that such spares should necessarily be utilised only for such machines which contain the same type of item as original component. 6.6 To reiterate, the ball bearings otherwise fall within the category of non-permissible spares, and the policy framers could never have intended and by putting specifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
