Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

PRABHA SRIDEVAN, J.

The respondent imported 10800 of HDPL on 11-01-2000 under an Open General Licence; it bonded the goods in a warehouse. On 09-02-2000, the inbound bill of entry was filed. On 26-05-2000, it obtained by transfer an Advance Licence under the DEEC Scheme in No.03026397 dated 19.11.1998 issued in the name of Indco remedies Ltd., Bombay. On 18.11.2000, the above DEEC Licence expired. The importer filed the Ex-Bond bill of Entry on 08.12.2000, for assessment of the imported goods. Since the validity of the licence had expired the Deputy Commissioner of Customs refused to grant the benefit of the Customs Notification No.31 of 1997 and held that the goods should be assessed on merits. On appeal, the CEGAT held that the only issue that should be considered is whether the material imported is covered by the licence, and allowed the appeal holding that as per the "Notification in question (that) the material imported should be covered by DEEC licence which follows that the licence is for the goods and not specifically for the importer alone". Even on the face of it, it appears that the CEGAT lost sight of the actual question to be decided by it. The CEGAT had itself framed it at the beginning of the impugned order i.e., "The question is as to whether the licence which was valid when the goods were under import at the time of shipment can be accepted by the authorities". So the issue was regarding the existence of a valid licence at the time of clearance and not whether the licence is goods-specific or importer-specific.

..."

The telegraphic release Advice issued by the authorities at Mumbai which is the port of registration reads thus :

"ALL ASPECTS FOR ASSESSMENT OF THE GOODS UNDER THE RELEVANT EXEMPTION NOTIFICATION SHOULD BE VERIFIED AT YOUR END(.) PLEASE SEE THAT THE IMPORTED ITEM IS SIMILAR IS QUALITY & TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS TO THE MATERIAL UTILISED IN THE EXPORT PRODUCT OF ALREADY EXPORTED(.) PARTY TO PRODUCE ORIGINAL LICENCE AT YOUR END FOR VERIFICATION OF ADMISSIBILITY OF THE GOODS AND VALIDITY OF LICENCE."

22. In Circular No.51 of 1995, it is indicated that TRAs should be issued only after satisfying that the licence in question is valid. It also shows that the Port of Clerance must verify all aspects under the relevant Exemption Notification and the admissibility of the goods "under the Advance Licence produced at the time of clearance". This definitely indicates a live Advance Licence and not a licence which has expired. Circular No.117 of 1995 says that the Customs House need not verify certain aspects "since all these aspects regarding licence can be verified at the Customs House/Port/ICD at which the goods are imported and sought to be cleared". The words "Aspects regarding licence" will definitely indicate the validity of the licence.

23. The Telegraphic Release Advice directs, "The party should produce original licence at your end for verification of admissibility of the goods and the validity of the licence" (emphasis supplied). This is addressed to the Port of Clearance. This also underscores the importance of the validity of the licence. Condition (iii) of the General Exemption No.84-I also refers to production of licence at the time of clearance. Therefore, even the circulars produced by the respondent only stress the importance of the validity of the licence. The order of the Tribunal is, therefore, clearly erroneous. Therefore, the substantial question raised in the present civil miscellaneous appeal is answered accordingly.