9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (7) TMI 198X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter alia of cinematographic colour films. 3. Learned counsel further stated that the impugned order relates amongst other things is determination of the question whether the applicant is entitled to import the jumbo rolls in question as `Actual User (Industrial) under Open General Licence, without a valid Industrial Licence under the provisions of Industries (Development Regulation) Act, 1951. 4. It is the case of the applicant in the appeal (as well as before the Collector) that the licensing provisions of the said Act of 1951 do not apply to the case of the applicant inasmuch as the number of workers employed in their factory (not a `factory within the meaning of the said Act) have always been less than 50. 5. The applicant subm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the said documents and it shall not come as surprise to the said respondent. The said documents were also before the Respondent in connection with its adjudication order in original No. 48/COLLR/1989, dated 15-9-1989. In any event the Respondent shall not be prejudicated if an order is made allowing the aforesaid additional documents to be taken on record. 8. Learned DR sought leave to raise a preliminary objection and stating that the appellants point that they were not required to take out a licence under the IDR Act is not one of their `grounds of appeal, and, therefore, the request for additional evidence with reference to such a ground should not be entertained. 9. Learned advocate submitted that this point has been mentioned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of IDRA. 13. Learned counsel stated that a perusal of IDRA shows that Section 3 gives the meaning of (i) existing industrial undertaking", (ii) factory and (iii) industrial undertaking . 14. It was his submission that the appellants were not an industrial undertaking within the meaning of Section 3(d) read with Section 3 (c) inasmuch as the number of workers in the appellants factory was always less than 50. 15. It was also his contention that the appellants were entitled to import the subject goods as an Actual User on the strength of SSI registration with the District Industries Centre, Ghaziabad. 16. He also stated that the import of jumbo rolls of width 1 mtr. and above of cinematographic colour film unexposed positive are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... covered by OGL. 24. Learned counsel stated that Schedule IV of the notification dated 16-2-1973 (as amended) covers industrial undertakings which are not exempted but it does not cover those units which are not classifiable as industrial undertakings in terms of IDRA. 25. Learned counsel further emphasized that the appellant s case is fully covered by the definition of Actual User (Industrial) given in the Import Policy certificate from the appropriate government ..... 26. We have considered the submissions made by both sides. We observe that this is not the stage for recording as to whose contentions are right or wrong. What we are basically concerned at the moment is, as to whether the documents sought to be taken on record were r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
