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

2004 (12) TMI 535

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... oject Import Regulations, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as 'Regulation' for short). For packing and dispatching of the said plant after the same was dismantled the Appellants engaged M/s. Decotrans. Initially M/s. Decotrans included the cost of containers also in the contract. This has been as clarified by M/s. Decotrans vide letter (Fax) dated 24-5-1994. 2. The appellants were granted Licence to import the said plant bearing No. P/CG/2043827, dated 17-6-1988. The said license was, inter alia, valid for import of refurbishing material, replacement parts etc. The said licence was issued for a CIF value of DM 46.75 million equivalent to Rs. 36,73,87,000/- and subsequently enhanced to DM 53.65 million equivalent to Rs. 42,16,11,000/-. 3. (a) On 14-11-1988 the appellants applied for an amendment, of the licence for endorsement to allow partial packing in used containers. The same was amended and endorsed by the Licensing authority on 22-12-1988 as under : - Valid for partially packed in used containers subject to the tradition that the used containers will not be disposed off without prior permission of the Licensing Authority. The value of the said licence was, however, not en .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uded in the consignment covered by the said Bill of Entry dated 2-2-1989. Accordingly, after having submitted the project Reconciliation Statement under cover of letter of 15-5-1992 as referred for finalisation under the Regulation, the Appellants enclosed a cheque for Rs. 35,58,215/- towards payment of Customs Duty on the said plates vide letter dated 17-7-1993. As the said cheque dated 17-7-1993 was not presented to the Bank for clearance and since more than six months elapsed, the Appellants annexed, a fresh cheque dated 14-4-1994 vide letter dated 26-4-1994 of the same amount with a request to send to the Appellants the receipted copy of the Challan for the same. By a letter dated 6-5-1994, the Superintendent of Customs, Surat, informed the Appellants that the matter was under investigation and therefore, the cheque for Rs. 35,58,204/- could not be accepted and hence they returned the same to the Appellants. (c) The Appellants admit that the said plates were used by, them to fabricate the 3 devices, namely Easy Flow devices, Briquette Chute Wear Plates. These devices were, required, to refurbish the said Plant for making the same operatable in India. (d) In respect of the 40 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... re was any mis-declaration of value with regard to the containers so as to justify their confiscation under section 111(m)? (ii) Whether duty of Rs. 17,40,000/- could be demanded. (b) On the issue, whether the import of such plates was covered by the Licence which has been specifically endorsed to include "refurbishing material"? it is found- (i) The licence was issued for an import of a second hand plant. The said licence was specifically amended to include the cost for dismantling, refurbishing, replacement of parts and equipments, packing and loading in respect of the second hand plant. (ii) Commissioner has taken an unduly narrow meaning of the expression Refurbishing material; without appreciating that the licence had been issued with a view to enable the appellant to relocate and restart the second hand plant in India this would obviously require some replacement and refurbishing. The expression "refurbishing material" as commonly understood, does not preclude material used in modification and improvement. In fact, the whole idea of refurbishment is to cause improvement. The word refurbishment in the new shorter Oxford English Dictionary is explained to mean- 'Brighten .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... erhauling of the old existing equipments. and or failure to prove that the devices were not part of the original plant. (iii) It is significant that the licence permitted not only refurbishing but also replacement; this would imply that the expression 'refurbishing' was used therein to include acts which were more than mere replacement. (iv) The judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of National Machinery Manufacturers Ltd. v. Union of India - 1980 (6) E.L.T. 717 (Bom.) cited in support on the proposition that in case of doubt, as to the scope of a licence, the benefit of doubt should be given to the importer would entitle the imports herein of the plates to be effected. Nothing contrary being shown. (d) On whether the calculation of duty liability on incoloy steel plates at Rs. 56,38,880/- is correct or not? it is found- (i) The duty payable on incoloy plates has been incorrectly computed at Rs. 56,38,880/- it is found- (ii) The dispute with regard to calculations is only on account of the following factors : (a) Freight and insurance has been separately added by the Department @ 20% even though such freight and insurance for the entire shipment was already assessed to d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of duty applied was 50% basic + 15% CVD. The re-calculation effected by the Commissioner's goes beyond the show-cause notice. The same therefore cannot be upheld. The Commissioner ought to have re-calculated the value, based on the correct FOB price (after deducting 2%), ought not to have included 20% of FOB value towards freight and insurance; and ought to have applied the duty rate applicable to project imports and not more than as proposed in the Notice. The higher rate of duty applied by him in the order is clearly unsustainable. There is force in appellants submission, that the project import rate of 90% (45% basic + 45 Auxiliary) ought to have been applied & is upheld, the matter is therefore required to be remanded back to re-determine the duty at Project Rate & re-determine the amount demanded. (e) On whether there was any mis-declaration of value with regard to the containers so as to justify their confiscation under section 111(m)? it is found- (i) Since appellant had entered into a contract with M/s Decotrans, for packing of the second-hand plant from Emden, and since the value of the said overall contract has already been included in the value of the second hand plan .....

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