1999 (8) TMI 151

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Respondents. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. The brief facts of the case are that the respondents herein had imported 57 MTs of polyester staple fibre valued at Rs. 20,07,500/- free of duty against an Advance Licence dated 27-3-1985. Out of the imported quantity, they utilised 18.060 MTs of fibre for manufacture of polyester blended yarn of 90/10 count meant for export an .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that no prior permission was required for useof imported goods as replenishment in the factory of production, that the contravention, if any, was purely technical or venial in nature and not substantive in character, and hence issued a warning and caution to the respondents, and dropped further proceedings. Hence this appeal by the Revenue. 2. We have heard Shri R.S. Sangia, learned DR and Shri .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dvance licence. Admittedly, there is no charge that the goods were diverted to third parties. What is prohibited is sale, loan, transfer, disposal of imported inputs in any manner to others without the permission of the licensing authorities. No such thing has happened in this case. We also note the submission of the respondents that the proceedings initiated by the licensing authorities for viola .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X