Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

ii) IMNPL is a government recognized three star export house, engaged in the business of manufacturing, import and export of gold jewellery and other allied bullion items.
iii) IMNPL has been duly issued an Import Export Code (IEC) bearing No.0514037342 from the office of the Joint Director, Directorate General of Foreign Trade (hereinafter referred to as 'DGFT') and is stated to have earned foreign exchange valuing around 150 million USD for the country.

22. It has been argued on behalf of petitioners that findings returned by the CESTAT in its order 13.11.2019 were ignored by the respondents, as when IMNPL approached the CESTAT against the order dated 04.10.2019 passed by the Additional D.G. rejecting the prayer for provisional release of seized goods; CESTAT passed an Order dated 13.11.2019 in favour of IMNPL directing release of all seized goods. Before returning its findings, the CESTAT noted the requirements for duty-free import of gold under the Advance Authorization Scheme and the Export Exhibition Scheme. It was noted by the Tribunal that IMNPL possesses Importer-Exporter Code and is entitled to import upto 1,000 kgs of gold under the Advance Authorization Scheme. The Tribunal further noted that under the scheme of export exhibition, manufactured jewellery is taken abroad after preparing invoices, filing shipping bills and the jewellery is inspected by the customs and the photographs of the said jewellery are kept under the seal of customs. The Tribunal also observed that re-import of the jewellery exported is duty free if done within 60 days of closing of the exhibition. At the time of re-import, Customs authorities verify the relevant particulars (export documents) and tally the photographs of the jewellery with the re-imported jewellery. The Tribunal observed that all supporting documents related to jewellery such as assessed bills of entry, packing lists, export documents and photographs with gate pass were in possession of petitioner Amit Pal Singh. The Tribunal held that the Revenue Authority has failed to provide any cogent reason for its refusal to provisionally release the goods. The Tribunal further held that there exists no ground to hold that the seized goods fall under the category of "prohibited goods" as the Appellant is in possession of all legal documents necessary. Accordingly, CESTAT ordered release of all the seized gold jewellery, bars and articles.