9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (2) TMI 98X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt appellants are in possession of a letter dated 21-12-98 from M/s. Hindustan Shipyard Ltd., to this effect. The ship was initially purchased by M/s. Dempo Steamships Ltd., who plied it for some years. The ship was then auctioned and was purchased by the present appellant M/s. Mustan Taherbhai in February, 1993. A bill of entry was filed by them claiming the vessel to be an Indian built vessel. The Customs assessed the vessel provisionally seeking payment of 5% customs duty. The appellants then went to the High Court of Gujarat. The High Court directed a bond to be filed with security deposit and exempted the appellants from the provisionally assessed duty of Rs. 75,89,375/-. Under the instructions of the High Court, an appeal was filed. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e claim of the appellants that since the ship had been cleared in terms of Notification 118/59-Cus., no further duty was chargeable even at the time of its being broken up. The Tribunal observed that a ship cleared in terms of Notification 118/59-Cus. covered its initial clearance, but when it was to be broken up, the provisions of Notification 262/58-Cus. or of the later Notification 113/87-Cus. would apply. The Tribunal accordingly dismissed the appeal filed by the present appellant. 4.Against the judgment, an appeal was filed in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court remanded the matter to the Tribunal directing the Tribunal to take note of the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of Baijnath Melaram v. Union of India and others [19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tured in bond. He submitted that this position was well established and accepted in practice by the Customs authorities. In support of his statement he placed on record a bill of entry for clearance of a ship similarly manufactured where the duty was paid only on the imported portions of the vessel. He also placed on records, the extract from the Customs (Preventive) Manual (Central) relating to warehousing operations and specifically relating to manufacture in bond. 8.Shri Pundir claimed that the entire case of the appellant was based on the presumption that the ship was cleared in terms of Notification 118/59-Cus. The claim that it was manufactured in India is also based thereupon. It was his submission that on the date of clearance i.e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en re-produced. It was pointed out by Shri Doiphode that the date thereupon was printed as "19th October, 1965". But since the Gazette was dated 16th October, 1965, it was accepted to be a printing error. 10.Shri Doiphode in his rebuttal submitted that the contention that the subject ship had been initially cleared under Notification No. 118/59 had been made right from the beginning and it was carried up to Supreme Court where the remand order was made. He submitted that there was a certificate to this effect by M/s. Hindustan Shipyard Ltd., and also there was a letter from the jurisdictional officers certifying this fact. Reliance was again placed on the judgment of the High Court in the case of Baijnath Melaram. It was claimed that sinc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ind no substance in the submissions of Shri Doiphode, that a new case is being made out by the Revenue at the present stage. 14.It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that as far as facts are concerned, the Tribunal is the final authority and the Court would go into only the questions of the law at the appeal stage. Therefore, the Tribunal would first record the correct facts and then in the factual perspective would locate and apply the relevant law. 15.When the fact is accepted that Notification 118/59-Cus. did not exist at the time of clearance of the vessel from the Shipyard, the persistent plea that the ship was manufactured in the warehouse and that it was manufactured in India and that it attracted excise duty alone need n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch goods, the Central Government, if satisfied that in the interests of the establishment or development of any domestic industry it is necessary so to do, may, by notification in the Official Gazette, exempt the imported materials from the whole or part of the excess rate of duty". 19.The rate of duty referred in the above section would necessarily mean rate of customs duty. Wording of the section would indicate both components and the goods manufactured therefrom would be subject to customs duty. Therefore, on this ground also the argument that any goods made in Customs Bonded Warehouse are deemed to be made in India must be rejected. 20.Shri Doiphode submits that if the duty of customs has to be paid, it has to be limited to that cal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
