9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (7) TMI 437X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Notification No. 133/87-Cus., was required to be paid. 3. The matter was posted for hearing on 25-5-1998 when Shri A.V. Naik, Advocate appeared for the appellants, Shri A.K. Agarwal, SDR represented the respondent/Revenue. 4. Shri A.V. Naik, Advocate stated that the vessel M.V. Jagat Priya was manufactured in India and there could be no import of the goods manufactured in India. As Ocean-going vessel it was visiting foreign ports but it could not be considered as an export of the vessel. He referred to the provisions of exemption Notification No. 118/59-Cus., dated 13-6-1959 and submitted that the Ocean-going vessels manufactured by Hindustan Shipyard Ltd. enjoyed exemption from the payment of Customs duty when they were cleared for home consumption and themselves this exemption would be available even when the vessel was subsequently intended to be broken. 5. In reply, Shri A.K. Agarwal, SDR stated that the Ocean-going vessel was manufactured by Hindustan Shipyard Ltd. under Customs Bond in their Customs Bonded Shipyard. Such manufacture under Customs Bond could not be taken as indigenous manufacture. The clearance from such Customs Bonded Shipyard were treated as import i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent of appropriate Customs duties. M/s. Hindustan Shipyard Ltd. effected clearance of the vessel in terms of these provisions under the Act. Thereafter on purchase by M/s. Dempo Steamships Ltd. the vessel plied as an Ocean-going vessel visiting foreign ports. It remained an Ocean-going vessel till it was intended to be broken by the present appellants. 7. The appellants purchased the vessel in Feb., 1993 and the same was delivered to them in March, 1993. The bill of entry was filed by them in May, 1993. During the time when the vessel was intended to the broken, there was a separate specific entry for the vessels and other floating structures for breaking-up. The import of vessel as Ocean-going vessel was covered under separate classification, and the vessel imported for breaking-up was classifiable separately. The same vessel, which had been earlier cleared as Ocean-going vessel if subsequently intended to be broken was taken as a different import as there was a separate Tariff entry for the vessels to be broken-up. It has been clearly established by Notification No. 133/87-Cus., dated 19-3-1987. 8. Under Notification No. 133/87-Cus., dated 19-3-1987 issued in suppersession ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roken, the importer shall present a fresh bill of entry to be Collector of Customs, and thereupon such goods shall be chargeable with the duty which would be payable on such goods as if such goods were entered for home consumption under section 46 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962) on the date of the presentation of such fresh bill of entry to the Collector of Customs for the purposes of break-up of such goods. It is clear from the provisions of this Notification No. 133/87-Cus :- (1) The vessels and other floating structures if imported for the purposes of breaking-up were required to pay the appropriate duty of Customs and they were not eligible for exemption otherwise provided for vessels and floating structures when imported into India. (2) Even when the vessels and floating structures had availed of the benefit of exemption under that Notification No. 133/87-Cus. on import into India (including import from the Customs Bonded Warehouse), they were required to pay appropriate duty of Customs if subsequent to their import they were intended to be broken. In such a situation, the importer was required to present a fresh bill of entry as if the goods had been impor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty or doubt. It says that ocean-going vessels other than vessels imported to be broken-up are exempt from payment of Customs duty leviable thereon. It then says that where any such ocean-going vessel is subsequently broken-up it shall be chargeable with the duty which would be payable if it were imported then for being broken-up. The idea behind the notification evidently was to encourage the import of ocean-going vessels. The notification also contemplates and provides for the situation where an imported ocean-going vessel becomes not seaworthy after a few years and the ship-owner decides to scrap/break it. It provides that in such a situation it would be deemed as if the ship is imported for breaking-up when it is broken up and the Customs duty is charged on that basis. The notification thus creates a fiction viz., the vessel must be deemed to have been imported for being broken-up when it is broken-up, though as a matter of fact the import was at an earlier point of time. Ordinarily speaking, no doubt, Customs duty is levied with reference to the date of actual import but the exemption notification says that if the ship imported is an ocean-going vessel it shall be exempt from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hipyard at Gandhigram, Vishakhapatnam when cleared thereform were to be taken as imported into India. The exemption under the provisions of the Customs Act in favour of the clearances for home consumption establishes that the vessel was not be taken as if it was being imported into India. This Notification is entirely for the first import (clearance from the Customs Shipyard). Subsequent diverstion for breaking is provided under Notification No. 133/87-Cus. The Notification No. 118/59-Cus. could not be read for import for the purposes of breaking up of the vessels, which was even earlier covered by another Notification No. 262/58-Cus., dated 11-10-1958 which was on the statute book even before the issue of Notification No. 118/59-Cus. which was dated 13-6-1959. It was the Notification No. 262/58-Cus. which was before the Supreme Court in the case of U.O.I. v. Jalyan Udyog (supra). Thus, the Notification No. 118/59-Cus., could not be applied for the vessels imported for the purpose of breaking-up during the relevant time when the vessels were cleared for breaking, as the vessels for breaking-up were separately classifiable under the Customs Tariff. 11. From para-12 of the statemen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
