Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

The Commissioner Of Customs vs Sri.Ankineedu Manganti on 28 May, 2010

Bench: C.N.Ramachandran Nair, P.S.Gopinathan

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Cus.Appeal.No. 11 of 2010()


1. THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. SRI.ANKINEEDU MANGANTI,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL,SC,CB EX

                For Respondent  :SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.S.GOPINATHAN

 Dated :28/05/2010

 O R D E R
          C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ.
                           ---------------------------
                     CUS. APPEAL No. 11 OF 2010
                           --------------------------
                  Dated this the 28thday of May, 2010

                            J U D G M E N T

Ramachandran Nair, J.

The appeal is filed against the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal holding that the confiscation of respondent's vehicle for non production of type approval certificate is untenable. The learned standing counsel appearing for the appellant contended that Import policy requires production of type approval certificate in respect of every model of vehicle imported. However, we notice from the Tribunal's order that the vehicle imported is produced by the world renowned vehicle manufacturer Toyota. It is the further finding that same types of vehicles are imported to India on earlier occasions. In our view type approval certificate is mainly required to ensure that the vehicle is safe and road worthy for public use and it is to be considered by the registering authority while registering the vehicle and not by the Customs authority when it is imported. Besides this, the assumption of the department that the importer has imported the vehicle which is unfit for use on road is also absurd. In fact, in a similar case, the Delhi High Court has upheld the view of the Tribunal because the Cus App.No.11/2010 2 importer cannot be expected to get what is not possible to obtain. We therefore do not find any merit in the appeal filed by the department. Consequently the appeal is dismissed.

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR (JUDGE ) P.S.GOPINATHAN (JUDGE ) vps Cus App.No.11/2010 3