9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (4) TMI 299X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the decided is as to whether or not the Import Trade Control Licence produced by the importers is eligible for import of the goods in question which are not listed in the Appendix of the Handbook of procedure, 1st April, 1992 to 31st March, 1997 (Volume-I) and therefore not covered by the said Licence. (ii) The second question of Law is whether there is any scope for applying the common parlance test to arrive at the right identity of the goods in question for the purpose of Licence coverage when the item undisputable falling under Tariff Heading No. 9503.90 is consumer goods and hence not covered by the licence produced by the importers. (iii) The third question of Law is whether there was any scope on the part of the importers to form ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id Order of the Tribunal is a detailed Order, considering and appreciating the entire evidence on record as also the relevant provisions of the EXIM Policy, he submitted that no question of law as such arises for referring to the High Court, inasmuch as there was no ambiguity in the Tribunal s Order. 4. As regards the paragraph referred to by the learned JDR, he submitted that the entire paragraph has to be read as a whole and a part thereof, cannot be made the basis for drawing a conclusion that the entire Order was passed on presumption and assumption. 5. I have considered the submissions of both sides. From the Order in question, I find that the short question to be decided therein was as to whether the Special Import Licence granted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inasmuch as the entire paragraph which discusses the legal position and the evidence on record has to be read as a whole and a few lines out of the same cannot be extracted and read separately and be made the basis for referring the matter to the High Court. 7. Paragraph 5 which deals with the submissions of both sides and discusses the legal position is reproduced below :- 5. I have considered the submissions of both sides. The appellant in this case have not challenged the classification of the goods as falling under item 9503.90. There is also no dispute that the appellants have imported the said items under a special import licence issued by the licensing authority. In the said licence against the column description, it is mentione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble Supreme Court has held that even it Department s case is accepted as regards the classification in respect of the articles imported by the appellant in that case, the burden still lies on the Customs Department to show that the appellant had acted dishonestly or contumaciously or with deliberate or distinct object of breach of law. In the instant case, I find that special import licence was obtained by the appellants for import of the items in question. The department has not been able to put on record any evidence to show that there was any mala fide on the part of the importers. Even if presuming for a second that the goods are not importable under the Special Import Licence produced by the appellant, nevertheless going by the common ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
