9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (7) TMI 162X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etitioner for home consumption should have been subjected to Notification No. 129/76, dated 2nd August, 1976 for payment of customs duty or Notification No. 40/87, dated 4th February, 1987. By Notification No. 40/87, dated 4th February, 1987, the Notification No. 129/76, dated 2nd August, 1976 was amended and instead of the words 'from the whole of the duty of customs leviable thereon which is spe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled an application for refund on 25th January, 1987 claiming that they are entitled to get the benefit of Exemption Notification No. 129/76. However, the Respondent No. 3 rejected the said application by order dated 21st July, 1987 holding that the Petitioners cannot get the benefit of the said Notification No. 129/76 and cannot claim full exemption. They were liable to pay duty as per the notifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a) consumption under Section 46, on the date on which a bill of entry in respect of such goods is presented under that section;" In view of this, it is not possible to hold that the Petitioner should have been given the benefit of Notification No. 129/76, dated 2nd August, 1976 and the goods should have been exempted from payment of customs duty. 6.The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to grant such exemption in the public interest then the Court cannot sit in judgment or consider sufficiency of the reasons which appealed to the Respondents. It is for the respondents to take such policy decisions. Therefore there is no substance in this contention. 7.At the time of admission, this Court on 28th September, 1987 directed the Respondents to deposit a sum Rs. 6,89,048/- and the Pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
