9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (8) TMI 71X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ial Imprest Licence on 11-1-1991 for import of raw materials and components (Roller Press) for manufacture of Cement Plant Machinery under Duty Exemption Scheme. The import against the Special Imprest Licence was exempt from payment of duty. Accordingly, in March 1992, Petitioners imported 5 Rollers [Presses]. The goods were cleared for home consumption. The goods on importation in 1992 were given benefit of duty exemption. It is the case of the Petitioners that the four Rollers failed during the period December, 1994 upto February, 1995 and since the Rollers were required to be replaced the damaged/failed Rollers came to be re-exported to Germany in May, 1995 (i.e. after three years). The replaced Rollers thereafter once again came to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ners. It is not necessary to go into various authorities cited on behalf of the Petitioners because the entire issue which arises in this Petition is a pure issue of fact. The legal propositions advanced on behalf of the Petitioners are well settled. They are required to be applied to the facts of the present case. We may also mention that the learned counsel for the Petitioners conceded that the impugned order is appealable but it was argued on behalf of the Petitioners that since the law was well settled and since the impugned Authority has acted without jurisdiction, the matter could be decided at this stage particularly because, according to the Petitioners, the Respondents were wrongly demanding duty. 5.On basic facts, there is no di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oners, the Rollers imported in 1995 were entitled to the benefit of exemption because the Central Government has exempted goods imported into India for repairs. It is well settled that exemption Notification is required to be read strictly. As stated hereinabove, ultimately it will depend on facts of each case as to whether the import of the Rollers in 1995 on the facts of this case constitutes Repair under the Notification. One more aspect may also be mentioned namely that after the Petitioners received letter of the Director General of Foreign Trade dated 15-2-1995, Petitioners applied for ad hoc/Special Exemption under Section 25(2) of the Customs Act by approaching Ministry of Finance. This application was also rejected because the Gove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
