9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (12) TMI 183X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the Appellate Tribunal justified in relying on the case of UK Compositors v. Collector of Customs, Madras, when no copy of the order nor any published report thereof was produced by the Respondent nor a copy thereof made available to the Applicant by the Hon ble Tribunal on the date of the hearing for making submissions thereon? iii. Is the Appellate Tribunal right in concluding that the UK Compositors case established a ratio to the effect that a firm contract within the meaning of para 3 of Appendix 6 requires to be supported by the opening of a letter of Credit ? iv. Should not the Appellate Tribunal have held that the use of the expression firm order backed by irrevocable letter of credit occuring in sub-para (ii) of para 5 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on amount to a change of policy for which no power is vasted in the Appellate Tribunal ? viii. Should not the expression firm order been interpreted by the Appellate Tribunal harmoniously and/or consistently with the provision in para 218(2) of April 1988 - March 1991 Policy Book Vol. I (as amended upto 31-3-1988) providing for transferability of the licence throughout the period of its validity. ix. Would not the construction put on the expression firm order by the Appellate Tribunal requiring the opening of a letter of credit with the placing of the order within six months of licence date negate the policy dispensation referred to in question VIII above ? x. Is the Appellate Tribunal right in upholding the order of confiscation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rrecovable L/C and hence, the condition of the licence had not been fulfilled. He, however, observed that since licence was specific, he was taking a lenient view. Goods were confiscated under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 but permitted to be redeemed on payment of Rs. 72,000/- as redemption fine. Against the adjudication order of the Additional Collector, the Applicants filed an appeal before the Tribunal which led to the passing of the order under reference. While passing the said order, the Tribunal took note of a decision in the case of U.K. Compositors in Appeal No. C/360/91, decided on 10-11-1993 which has since been reported in 1994 (69) E.L.T. 758. The operative part of the Tribunal s order confirming the adjudication orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Combi, Singapore could not be taken to be vouched by the earlier contract Going by the rationale of our decision above, we hold that the situation in the present case is not in any way different from that in the case above. I, therefore, hold that ratio of the decision cited supra would squarely apply to the facts of the present case and following the same I find that the lower authority s order has to be upheld and the appeal has to be dismissed. 6. The redemption fine levied is about 10% of the value of the goods and the Ld. lower authority has been rather lenient in fixing such a low fine and there is no warrant to reduce the same and as no case has been made out for reduction of the same. 7. In view of the above, the appeal is dism ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not applicable to firm order. Again, he referred to the provisions contained in Appendix 6 of the same Policy book wherein condition No. 5 governing the imports under open general licence lays down that in the case of raw materials, components, samples and spares, protection will be available in respect of firm orders backed by irrevocable Letter of Credit opened before the date of the public notice. The use of the expression firm order is distinct from irrevocable Letter of Credit and it has been specially provided here that the firm orders have to be backed by irrevocable Letter of Credit. In the relative import licence in question there is no such condition that the firm orders are to be backed by irrevocable Letter of Credit. In view o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... actly is the scope of the expression firm Order and as there is no authoritative pronouncement in the matter I am satisfied that a question of law has arisen on this limited point which requires to be referred to the High Court. 6. In the Reference Application, certain point has been raised that the Tribunal fell in error in relying upon a decision which was not in existence at the time of hearing of the appeal, as a result of which it was not possible for them to distinguish the facts involved in that case from the present case. I am not convinced that merely because a decision had been cited and certain conclusions taken therein followed in the present case, it was not open to the Tribunal to come to the conclusion which it did, based ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
