9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (10) TMI 221X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of new car cannot be denied simply on the basis of its prior registration before shipment to India. The Board’s Circular has also clarified the point. It is also seen from the impugned order that the car was registered in October 2007 and the shipment was made in January 2008. Further, from the Examination Report, it is seen that the car has run only for 16 km. From this, it is very clear that the registration is only a formality – car can not be held as used car – Exemption allowed – penalty and fine reduced. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it of the Notification should not be denied. The said notification is reproduced herein below. (ix) Subject : Extension of benefit under Customs Notification 21/2002-Cus., Sl. No. 344 for a new Car registered for Transport to Airport from showroom and not for use in the country of manufacture. Issue in Brief : This matter was discussed at the Tariff Conference of Chief Commissioners of Customs held at Shillong from 13th - 15th May, 2004 [Agenda Point N-8]. The exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus Sl. No. 344 is allowed to "motor cars and other motor vehicles principally designed for the transport of persons (other than those of heading 8702) including station wagons, racing cars, new, which have not been registered anywhere prior ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of the Tribunal in the case of Bhargavan Biju v. CC, Cochin - 2002 (150) E.L.T. 620 (Tri.-Bang.) wherein a decision in favour of revenue had been given. 7. The learned advocate stated that he said decision cannot be made applicable to the present case as the case relates to the year 2002 and during that period the clarification of the Board was not available and also the Policy was different. 7.1 As regards the quantum of fine and penalty, the learned counsel stated that for violation of the EXIM Policy with regard to the import in a non-designated port, a very heavy penalty is not warranted and they relied on the decision of this Bench in the case of D'Souza Lawrence v. CC (A), Cochin - 2007 (215) E.L.T. 400 (Tri.-Bang.) wherein for su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
