2011 (3) TMI 1297 - AT - Customs

Re-export - Notification No. 93/2004-Cus. dated 10-9-2004 - It is claimed that due to slow down in economic activities the supplier did not want further job work to be done by the appellant and asked for return of the balance of imported parts as such - Held that - In the present case the goods have been imported duty-free i.e. subject to nil assessment. The appellants are only asking for re-export of the goods in the circumstances mentioned above. The reasoning adopted by the Commissioner for rejecting re-export cannot be appreciated. It is not the case that the condition of the notification has been violated and therefore the Commissioner has held the goods to be liable for confiscation or has demanded any duty. Therefore the order of the Commissioner rejecting the request for re-export cannot be sustained. The same is set aside. The Commissioner shall allow re-export subject to the appellants proving that the goods sought to be exported are the same as the goods which were imported.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against rejection of re-export request for duty-free imported parts of printing machinery under Notification No. 93/2004-Cus.

Analysis:
The appellants imported parts of printing machinery for job work, but due to the supplier's refusal to continue, they requested re-export of the balance of goods. The Commissioner rejected the request, stating that since some parts were used for manufacturing sub-assemblies, the remaining parts cannot be considered unfit for use. The appellants argued that as they are not the owners of the goods and the supplier wants the return, re-export should be permitted. They cited precedents and Foreign Trade Policy provisions allowing re-export of goods in similar circumstances.

Upon review, the Tribunal found that while the goods were not unfit for use, the supplier's refusal to allow further job work made it impossible for the appellants to keep the goods. The Tribunal noted that the Foreign Trade Policy permits re-export of goods without import/export restrictions. As the goods were duty-free, the appellants' request for re-export should be governed by Section 74 of the Customs Act, 1962 on drawback quantum. The Tribunal disagreed with the Commissioner's reasoning and set aside the rejection, ordering the Commissioner to allow re-export upon proof that the goods to be exported are the same as those imported.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, emphasizing that the Commissioner's rejection of the re-export request was not justified, as the goods were duty-free and the conditions for re-export were not violated. The Tribunal directed the Commissioner to permit re-export, subject to verification of the goods' identity with the imported ones.