Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1998 (4) TMI 320

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... riod between 27-9-1989 and 12-3-1990 against Advance Licence dated 22-2-1989 and claimed duty-free clearance in terms of Notification No. 116/88, dated 30-3-1988 as amended. The Department by show cause notice stated that as per paragraph 244(1) of the Import and Export Policy, 1988-91 and as per Notification No. 116/88, replenishment materials for which duty-free clearance was sought should have the same characteristics and technical specifications of those actually used in the product exported. Since there was difference in characteristics/specifications between the goods exported and the imported replenishment materials sought to be cleared duty-free, the Department alleged that the appellants were not eligible for duty exemption envisag .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Customs Authorities had no authority to refuse the clearance of the imported goods once the Licensing Authority had given licence. The Customs Authorities could not go into the question as to whether the goods allowed to be imported under an Advance Licence scheme could or could not be used for the manufacture of the resultant products. He referred to the order passed by the Hon ble Supreme Court dated 27-8-1991, in the SLP filed by the present appellants against the order of the Division Bench of Bombay High Court on the same issue in which the Apex Court after hearing the parties, was pleased to direct the Department to consider the question whether the goods imported tallied with the description of the goods as set out in the advance lic .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ther the thickness of the imported goods was less or more or whether the imported raw materials can be put to use for producing the resultant products. Even assuming the thickness of the imported materials was less than the thickness of the exported materials, it could not be held as reason enough for denying the benefit of Notification No. 116/88 as there was no bar to melt the raw material to produce the resultant products or to subject the goods to other processes for producing the goods of relevant specifications. He also submitted that the Collector had wrongly placed reliance on the letter received from M/s. SAIL and M/s. Nippon Dendro Ispat Limited stating that the colour coated materials are not galvanised materials. He submitted th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... were imported strictly in accordance with licence, the order imposing penalty was not sustainable. 7. As regards the question of limitation, ld. JDR referred to the directions of the Supreme Court dated 27-8-1991 directing the Collector of Customs to consider the question whether the goods imported tallied with the description of the goods in the import licence and if he was satisfied with the description of the goods in the import licence, then the Collector shall release the goods and if it does not, he may proceed in accordance with law. It was pursuant to this order, the verification was carried out by the Collector and pursuant to such verification the goods were released. Ld. JDR pointed out that there was no direction by the Apex C .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ibility of any goods for exem- ption under Notification No. 116/88 such goods which were imported for the manufacture of resultant products or replenishment of materials used in the manufacture of resultant products should be goods which necessarily conform to the technical characteristics and specifications contained in the licence. When the goods imported were different in terms of specifications and technical characteristics from the material used in the resultant products exported by the appellants, they would not be eligible for exemption under Notification No. 116/88. 9. In the present case, it is not in dispute that Part C of DEEC Book showed the items M.S. Secondary Cold rolled sheets/coils defective/second and the description o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates